'False' green ad complaints rise
I cannot for the life of me understand why it gets done or what is in the heads of those who think they can get away with it.,
Do they not realise that by creating a near automatic aura of doubt on anything conveying a green message by such actions, far from leading us (the public, authorities and commercial world) towards a mutually rewarding era of environmentally (and financially) rewarding relationships, these cynical efforts are simply making it more difficult and stealing time that is already precious to effect changes in public behaviour?
There are clear guidelines out there, but a weekly read of the ASA adjudications makes depressing reading as to the motives and/or competence of those involved.
I'm not big on negativity, but I'm seriously thinking of creating a 'wall of sLime' on Junkk.com where these examples get hung up for all to see, along with the names of those involved in their creation.
Joel Makover - The Greening of P.R.: Read All About It
'The world of public relations has discovered green with a vengeance, and the big global firms seem locked, loaded, and ready to fire up their drum beating.'
Consider a just-released survey by Ipsos Reid, which found that "Consumers appear to be wary of companies who label their products as being 'green', or environmentally friendly." The study found that seven in ten (70%) Americans either "strongly" (12%) or "somewhat" agree (58%) that "when companies call a product 'green' (meaning better for the environment), it is usually just a marketing tactic."
These P.R. firms will have their work cut out for them.
I'm not the only one with a watching brief, it seems.
ASA
Indy - Innocent found guilty of making false health claims - Why on earth would they do it? Great product. Great brand. Great reputation. But then they have grown to a size where there are scores of levels of munchkins vying for their place in the corporate pie. I had high hopes of getting something meaningful going with both Junkk.com and RE:tie vis a vis their commitment to re-everything, but hit a wall of trendy young things in the 'marketing' dept. who seemed unable to take a message let alone pass it on. Sad.
Brand republic - Smoothies ad pulled up over detox claims
Guardian - Innocent found guilty over smoothie health claims - well, there's no such thing as ...
Indy - Can you not know that you are using forced labour? - Not really my usual cuppa this guy, but he kinda nails it. And OK, it isn't really right for this post, either.
Mad - Lost innocence
I think all it does is show how size can create all sorts of problems.
It is hard to imagine that in leaner times those running the show would not be on top of such things. But now there will be layer upon layer of departmental munchkins (just try getting past the bananaphone to talk to a sensible decision maker without getting all sorts of folk running turf interference these days) jockeying to make their mark, so such things creep in.
As to the McDonalds hook up... what is the problem? Surely getting something healthy...ier in there is better than nothing? And if one is of a campaigning bent, better to work from within than standing outside shouting all or nothing impracticalities. And who, beyond the media, are these excitable folk who can get so turned off by such commercial decisions? I felt the same way over the hoo-haa that Anita Roddick had flogged off Body Shop. It was hers to do with as she felt. And if feeling generous (if change was her aim) was the risk of comprising the Body Shop brand not worth elevated the aspirations of the parent ?
Mind you, it can create some fun. I suspect those who bought out Ben & Jerry's haven't a clue what is going on sometimes: link
Brand Republic - NOT SO INNOCENT
I was going to post but it was more question so forgive me taking the more direct route.
Having had a rather frustrating time of late with innocent (there are aspects of our businesses that suggest(ed) synergy), which I have pretty much identified with their growth curve out-stripping their original (and, I believe, sincerely held) stated desire to not be like the rest, your comment resonated.
However, as I blogged (link above), I laid this more at the door corporate B*****cks and gatekeeper culture. But you seem to be suggesting that there is something more predictable than even this. You would not have written what you did had you not believed it, but I must say I am surprised that marketing gurus, much less those whose hunger has pushed them to darker places, could simply feel the risk of such a strategy could be worth it.
Look how much damage this one small thing has created for the brand, versus what minute % increase they may have generated overstated the benefits of this product.
I truly hope you are wrong. But fear you may be right.
Guardian - Hot air
I'm holding my breath.
Just as a precaution, mind.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Build it, and...
I'm always a tad confused as to what is mandatory and what is advisory when it comes to officail enagegemnt, especially with matters enviro. So I found this interesting: Guidance to help industry respond to the zero carbon challenge
There's no link to the PR, so I'll pop most down here verbatim (sans 'Minster says Yay' puff, which was most of it).
Communities and Local Government published revised guidance to help the construction industry respond to the challenge of meeting the zero carbon homes target.
It responds to comments and feedback from industry, and provides greater clarity in a number of areas including the future eligibility of different energy sources and the method for calculating anticipated water consumption.
HM Treasury will shortly lay draft regulations before Parliament setting out definition of a zero carbon home for stamp duty land tax purposes. An exemption on stamp duty land tax for new zero carbon homes was announced by the then Chancellor Gordon Brown last December.
The Budget 2007 stated: "that from 1 October 2007 all new homes meeting the zero carbon standard costing up to £500,000 will pay no stamp duty, and zero-carbon homes costing in excess of £500,000 will receive a reduction in their stamp duty bill of £15,000. The exemption will be time limited for 5 years until 30 September 2012, but before the end of the time limit the Government will review the effectiveness of the relief and consider the case for an extension".
The key changes are:
* The way energy efficiencies for flats with and without renewables are calculated;
* The way water efficiencies are calculated; and
* The use of off-site renewable energy sources. In future, these will not be eligible unless directly connected to the development concerned. The Code continues to allow connection to gas and electricity grids as long as the home produces net zero carbon emissions over the year.
The Code Technical Guidance, including definition of zero carbon, will be kept under review as new evidence emerges about costs and practicalities, and as technologies develop
Key features of a zero carbon development could include technologies such as:
Combined heat and power
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) is a fuel-efficient energy technology that, unlike conventional forms of power generation, puts to use the by-product heat that is normally wasted to the environment. CHP can increase the overall efficiency of fuel use to more than 75 per cent, compared with around 50 per cent or less from conventional electricity generation.
District heating and cooling systems
District heating is a system for distributing heat generated in a centralized location for residential and/or commercial heating
requirements. District heating systems (DHS) distribute steam or hot water to multiple buildings. The heat can be provided from a variety of sources, including geothermal, CHP plants, waste heat from industry, and purpose-built heating plants.
Aquifer Thermal Energy
Aquifer thermal energy storage uses underground water reserves called aquifers. There are two wells (typically) on either side with hydraulic coupling. One well is for the warm water and the other one is for the cold.
In the winter, warm water is cooled and passed to the cold well. Energy is extracted by a heat exchanger for heating purposes. In summer, the process is reversed and cold water is used for cooling. Once heated, the water is stored in the cold well. The advantage about this system is that it is environmentally safe; the water which circulates from underground to the heat exchangers and back can not be contaminated as it always remains in the system.
Ground Source Heat Pumps
Ground source heat pumps (GSHP) transfer heat from the ground into a building to provide space heating and, in some cases, to pre-heat domestic hot water.
Passive Heating
Passive heating systems are used in buildings which are insulated to a very high standard and make use of solar thermal gain and heat exchanges on ventilation systems, so that no external energy source (other than perhaps background heat generated by people living there and appliances) is required to keep the building warm.
Solar and Wind Energy
Solar energy can be used in a number of ways to provide energy. Passive solar energy is the use of sunlight to keep buildings warm through the direct warming effect of the sun on a building, eg via walls and glazing. Thermal solar panels which provide space heating and hot water. Another method is to convert solar energy to electricity in photovoltaic cells.
There's no link to the PR, so I'll pop most down here verbatim (sans 'Minster says Yay' puff, which was most of it).
Communities and Local Government published revised guidance to help the construction industry respond to the challenge of meeting the zero carbon homes target.
It responds to comments and feedback from industry, and provides greater clarity in a number of areas including the future eligibility of different energy sources and the method for calculating anticipated water consumption.
HM Treasury will shortly lay draft regulations before Parliament setting out definition of a zero carbon home for stamp duty land tax purposes. An exemption on stamp duty land tax for new zero carbon homes was announced by the then Chancellor Gordon Brown last December.
The Budget 2007 stated: "that from 1 October 2007 all new homes meeting the zero carbon standard costing up to £500,000 will pay no stamp duty, and zero-carbon homes costing in excess of £500,000 will receive a reduction in their stamp duty bill of £15,000. The exemption will be time limited for 5 years until 30 September 2012, but before the end of the time limit the Government will review the effectiveness of the relief and consider the case for an extension".
The key changes are:
* The way energy efficiencies for flats with and without renewables are calculated;
* The way water efficiencies are calculated; and
* The use of off-site renewable energy sources. In future, these will not be eligible unless directly connected to the development concerned. The Code continues to allow connection to gas and electricity grids as long as the home produces net zero carbon emissions over the year.
The Code Technical Guidance, including definition of zero carbon, will be kept under review as new evidence emerges about costs and practicalities, and as technologies develop
Key features of a zero carbon development could include technologies such as:
Combined heat and power
Combined Heat and Power (CHP) is a fuel-efficient energy technology that, unlike conventional forms of power generation, puts to use the by-product heat that is normally wasted to the environment. CHP can increase the overall efficiency of fuel use to more than 75 per cent, compared with around 50 per cent or less from conventional electricity generation.
District heating and cooling systems
District heating is a system for distributing heat generated in a centralized location for residential and/or commercial heating
requirements. District heating systems (DHS) distribute steam or hot water to multiple buildings. The heat can be provided from a variety of sources, including geothermal, CHP plants, waste heat from industry, and purpose-built heating plants.
Aquifer Thermal Energy
Aquifer thermal energy storage uses underground water reserves called aquifers. There are two wells (typically) on either side with hydraulic coupling. One well is for the warm water and the other one is for the cold.
In the winter, warm water is cooled and passed to the cold well. Energy is extracted by a heat exchanger for heating purposes. In summer, the process is reversed and cold water is used for cooling. Once heated, the water is stored in the cold well. The advantage about this system is that it is environmentally safe; the water which circulates from underground to the heat exchangers and back can not be contaminated as it always remains in the system.
Ground Source Heat Pumps
Ground source heat pumps (GSHP) transfer heat from the ground into a building to provide space heating and, in some cases, to pre-heat domestic hot water.
Passive Heating
Passive heating systems are used in buildings which are insulated to a very high standard and make use of solar thermal gain and heat exchanges on ventilation systems, so that no external energy source (other than perhaps background heat generated by people living there and appliances) is required to keep the building warm.
Solar and Wind Energy
Solar energy can be used in a number of ways to provide energy. Passive solar energy is the use of sunlight to keep buildings warm through the direct warming effect of the sun on a building, eg via walls and glazing. Thermal solar panels which provide space heating and hot water. Another method is to convert solar energy to electricity in photovoltaic cells.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Is it possible to agree and disagree at the same time
Mixed feelings on this one - No more greenwash, groups tell Government
The start... had me nodding away.
Then I ran into this: 'The good news is that there is now a broad consensus that climate change is real and man-made,'
Really? I am a total convert to doing all we can to reduce whatever we can and avoid waste wherever possible, because I do think there is negative climate change. But at best, on present evidence, I can only accept that whatever might be causing it man is simply making things a lot worse than it need be, and hence any moves to correct 'our' impact need to engaged with asap and big time. Getting some to the notion that mankind's numbers, activities and ambitions might be having an impact at all is proving tricky enough, and I am not sure going for the whole hog in this way won't spark more unnecessarily divisive and distracting stalling debates. Green simply cannot be viewed in such black and white terms if we are to achieve consensus enough to move on and make a difference together.
Meanwhile, on slightly less lofty local issues, to be slightly uncharitable one might ponder whether all these different quangos - with all these different departments and all these different budgets to meet all these different targets - may be competing a tad too much to allow a single (or at least sensibly coordinated) set of messages get through to the hapless punter at large.
I've lost count of the number of different ways I can measure just my carbon footprint, and often feel actual public purse funds would be better spent on tangible initiatives that help me actually DO something, rather than prop up vast empires of folk with massive comms budgets to share various box-ticking awareness-obsessed visions.
The start... had me nodding away.
Then I ran into this: 'The good news is that there is now a broad consensus that climate change is real and man-made,'
Really? I am a total convert to doing all we can to reduce whatever we can and avoid waste wherever possible, because I do think there is negative climate change. But at best, on present evidence, I can only accept that whatever might be causing it man is simply making things a lot worse than it need be, and hence any moves to correct 'our' impact need to engaged with asap and big time. Getting some to the notion that mankind's numbers, activities and ambitions might be having an impact at all is proving tricky enough, and I am not sure going for the whole hog in this way won't spark more unnecessarily divisive and distracting stalling debates. Green simply cannot be viewed in such black and white terms if we are to achieve consensus enough to move on and make a difference together.
Meanwhile, on slightly less lofty local issues, to be slightly uncharitable one might ponder whether all these different quangos - with all these different departments and all these different budgets to meet all these different targets - may be competing a tad too much to allow a single (or at least sensibly coordinated) set of messages get through to the hapless punter at large.
I've lost count of the number of different ways I can measure just my carbon footprint, and often feel actual public purse funds would be better spent on tangible initiatives that help me actually DO something, rather than prop up vast empires of folk with massive comms budgets to share various box-ticking awareness-obsessed visions.
100 Billion plastic bags!
We thought that we used a lot here in the UK, but that's the estimate of just how many of the ubiquitous plastic carrier bags the citizens of the USA get through each year. (That's equivalent to about 12 million barrels of oil each year!)
This from the New York Times argues that Americans need a complete change in behaviour before anything will ever be achieved.
I particularly liked the story of the lady who took her own reusable bags to a supermarket where they still packed all her groceries in plastic ones anyway!
"if we can’t change our behavior to deal with this one, we can’t change our behavior to deal with anything."
Well, let's see; with so much heavyweight muscle applied to the pols in the white house by the Big Oil boys and their brethren in the downstream petrochemicals industries, I can't see much significant change in behaviour occurring under this particular administration.
This from the New York Times argues that Americans need a complete change in behaviour before anything will ever be achieved.
I particularly liked the story of the lady who took her own reusable bags to a supermarket where they still packed all her groceries in plastic ones anyway!
"if we can’t change our behavior to deal with this one, we can’t change our behavior to deal with anything."
Well, let's see; with so much heavyweight muscle applied to the pols in the white house by the Big Oil boys and their brethren in the downstream petrochemicals industries, I can't see much significant change in behaviour occurring under this particular administration.
After you
Analogies abound on climate. So I was interested in this from the Economist, recalling a philosophical notion from my school days: Playing games with the planet
No a lot to get too optimistic about, mind.
No a lot to get too optimistic about, mind.
CONFERENCE - Applied Green - London
MONTH - Now!
FIELD: Enviro-related
WHEN: Oct 3
WHAT: APPLIED GREEN
WHAT... MORE?: 'Applied Green is not your usual conference. It's a festival of minds where the biggest names will tackle the biggest issue we face - the impact of green issues on conventional business and mindsets.
This is a day for anyone from any industry who cares about green issues. As you see from the speakers listed here you will find out about the latest green thinking across a range of fields in just one day.
What about the green debate? While the world obsesses about solutions to environmental problems, the media industry lacks a clear consensus on the environment. The interests that converge on the issue - business, consumers, government and conservation - clash chaotically.
Where's the centre of gravity for this crucial debate in the marketing and advertising arena? Why can't we create it? Why can't we build a green debate around the big themes, subjects and thinking in marketing?
At the end of the day we want to have come up with a leading position for the media industry. We want people to go away having learned about green media as well as green messages. We want to imspire new thinking, new solutions and new inventions and behaviour change.
WHERE: The British Library, London
WHO:
Greg Nugent, managing director, Eurostar
Jonathan Porritt, founder director, Forum For The Future
David Hieatt, founder of Howies.
Philip Gould, Philip Gould Associates
John Grant, co-founder of St Luke's, planner, consultant, author
Michael Bremans, chief executive, Ecover
Eugenie Harvey, founder of We Are What We Do
Adam Morgan, partner, eatbigfish
Naresh Ramchandani, Karmarama founder and Guardian columnist
Ben Terrett, co-founder, The Design Conspiracy
Michael Johnson, Johnson Banks
Marc Sands, marketing director,The Guardian
Matthew Anderson, group director of brand and communications, BSkyB
Russell Davies, Open Intelligence Agency
Dr Arlo Brady, special advisor, Freud Communications
Steve Howard, chief executive, The Climate Group
Arlo Brady, who is special advisor on sustainable development at Freud Communications, there's opinion and thought on the latest sustainability developments at http://greenlightbulb.blogspot.com. There's also an article putting the "greenrush" in a branding context at http://www.brandchannel.com/brand_speak.asp?bs_id=174.
HOW: Sooooo not free!
URL: http://www.eventsforce.net/haymarket/templates/sub/thome.csp?pageID=143561
COMMENTS: Well, it would be nice to go, but it's in London (fair do's; that's where most relevant folk are) and getting close to a grand. So one has to wonder how representative a group of those who care vs. those who can pay there will be. Still, if you want to run shoulders with some and maybe see a bit of green rub off, I guess it's the place to be.
This is posted 'as provided' from their site as a new blog feature
FIELD: Enviro-related
WHEN: Oct 3
WHAT: APPLIED GREEN
WHAT... MORE?: 'Applied Green is not your usual conference. It's a festival of minds where the biggest names will tackle the biggest issue we face - the impact of green issues on conventional business and mindsets.
This is a day for anyone from any industry who cares about green issues. As you see from the speakers listed here you will find out about the latest green thinking across a range of fields in just one day.
What about the green debate? While the world obsesses about solutions to environmental problems, the media industry lacks a clear consensus on the environment. The interests that converge on the issue - business, consumers, government and conservation - clash chaotically.
Where's the centre of gravity for this crucial debate in the marketing and advertising arena? Why can't we create it? Why can't we build a green debate around the big themes, subjects and thinking in marketing?
At the end of the day we want to have come up with a leading position for the media industry. We want people to go away having learned about green media as well as green messages. We want to imspire new thinking, new solutions and new inventions and behaviour change.
WHERE: The British Library, London
WHO:
Greg Nugent, managing director, Eurostar
Jonathan Porritt, founder director, Forum For The Future
David Hieatt, founder of Howies.
Philip Gould, Philip Gould Associates
John Grant, co-founder of St Luke's, planner, consultant, author
Michael Bremans, chief executive, Ecover
Eugenie Harvey, founder of We Are What We Do
Adam Morgan, partner, eatbigfish
Naresh Ramchandani, Karmarama founder and Guardian columnist
Ben Terrett, co-founder, The Design Conspiracy
Michael Johnson, Johnson Banks
Marc Sands, marketing director,The Guardian
Matthew Anderson, group director of brand and communications, BSkyB
Russell Davies, Open Intelligence Agency
Dr Arlo Brady, special advisor, Freud Communications
Steve Howard, chief executive, The Climate Group
Arlo Brady, who is special advisor on sustainable development at Freud Communications, there's opinion and thought on the latest sustainability developments at http://greenlightbulb.blogspot.com. There's also an article putting the "greenrush" in a branding context at http://www.brandchannel.com/brand_speak.asp?bs_id=174.
HOW: Sooooo not free!
URL: http://www.eventsforce.net/haymarket/templates/sub/thome.csp?pageID=143561
COMMENTS: Well, it would be nice to go, but it's in London (fair do's; that's where most relevant folk are) and getting close to a grand. So one has to wonder how representative a group of those who care vs. those who can pay there will be. Still, if you want to run shoulders with some and maybe see a bit of green rub off, I guess it's the place to be.
This is posted 'as provided' from their site as a new blog feature
Burma
I don't often get overtly political, and it's not this blog's place to stray too far from enviro issues (that said I have a notion that there is a lot of logging going on there), but I've been sent this which seems worthy: http://www.avaaz.org/en/stand_with_burma/tf.php?CLICK_TF_TRACK
I don't know just how effective online petitions are, but for the effort required I don't see this as anything other than a why not.
I don't know just how effective online petitions are, but for the effort required I don't see this as anything other than a why not.
The UK is also better than the Swiss at navies (for now)
I clicked on this with some anticipation: Blue skies, yellow sand and shades of green
And this did look like encouraging news: There’s little doubt that the UK is ahead of the green game.
However, I was then moved to comment:
Well, I'll take your word for it that the UK is 'ahead' of Spain, at least.
Though I still chortle as I read my Indy and see an Evian ad or my Guardian and get a 4x4 tootling across the banner. And I must look out for bio at my local Morrisons.
Have fun at the conference. As it's a long way away and a tad pricey at £649+VAT for the day I would have loved to come but for various reasons cannot. I hope those who can afford the time and money to do so will have lots of lovely green wheezes.
Hence your report will be welcome.
And this did look like encouraging news: There’s little doubt that the UK is ahead of the green game.
However, I was then moved to comment:
Well, I'll take your word for it that the UK is 'ahead' of Spain, at least.
Though I still chortle as I read my Indy and see an Evian ad or my Guardian and get a 4x4 tootling across the banner. And I must look out for bio at my local Morrisons.
Have fun at the conference. As it's a long way away and a tad pricey at £649+VAT for the day I would have loved to come but for various reasons cannot. I hope those who can afford the time and money to do so will have lots of lovely green wheezes.
Hence your report will be welcome.
Some FT. Some more comment.
I gave a cheer today to this news: End of paid-for content edges closer as FT.com makes changes
Now, what registration hoops will I be letting myself in for as I try and sign on/up?
Indy - FT.com to offer more free content to see off WSJ threat
Now, what registration hoops will I be letting myself in for as I try and sign on/up?
Indy - FT.com to offer more free content to see off WSJ threat
B(Ad)?
I was so busy posting to a blog today that I almost didn't notice the Google ad that had crept in on my own site.It was for, of all things, a Washington Lobbying Firm! Pretty much a bunch of guy saying 'we can 'assist' the democratic process any way you like if you have enough dough'.
Sadly, I rotating I lost it and can't seem to get it back to show the darned thing.
However, what I did get was this one under the heading 'Global Warming'. What caused me to pause was the odd notion that in solving it you could 'win a trip.'
Now I am all for incentives and and rewards 'n all. but surely the powers that be can come up with a slightly more appropriate prize these days?
Gis' a twirl
I have tended to dismiss anything that purports to be 'green' when it is associated with the word 'fashion', as the latter tends to depend on the less attractive extremes of consumption, but this looked worth a gander: Supermarket's eco- fashion under threat?
What the author has described kind of speaks for itself and I'll let you decide on the facts vs. the opinion, but it also to me shows the perils of 'dabbling' with issues such as this. And, indeed, those who see themselves as the leaders of the cause.
Every time I see a fashion spread in the Sunday glossies I tend to wince, as I have seen this week'; recycled 'must have' become 'so last year' by the next, which to me is such a mixed up message I'd prefer they just didn't get involved.
Sassybella - Ethical Smethical - Clothing, Ethics and London Fashion Week
What the author has described kind of speaks for itself and I'll let you decide on the facts vs. the opinion, but it also to me shows the perils of 'dabbling' with issues such as this. And, indeed, those who see themselves as the leaders of the cause.
Every time I see a fashion spread in the Sunday glossies I tend to wince, as I have seen this week'; recycled 'must have' become 'so last year' by the next, which to me is such a mixed up message I'd prefer they just didn't get involved.
Sassybella - Ethical Smethical - Clothing, Ethics and London Fashion Week
Saying and doing
Hot on the sentiments of my last post we move to this: Red tape and cuts see householders give up on green grants, MP says
That last bit made it look like it was simply a bit of electioneering until I saw the party to which the MP belonged.
One can see the... a... any government's dilemma. Almost anything designed to encourage going green either involves less revenue (LPG, etc) or forking out.
But I'm sorry, if the prime minister and other ministers are only capable of renewed pledges to extend Britain's action on climate change, but then allow reality on the ground not to catch up,then at best I have to ask what use they are.
And looking at the money doled out (£624k?)to the number of homes (629?) out of all eligible in the UK, I have to wonder how much was spent administering the whole thing.
Any bets on more than has been provided?
As it is of value, I reproduce here the actual grants as outlined. It may still be worth the effort trying:
Ground source heat pump (water/space heat): Maximum of £1,200, or 30% of the total, whichever is lower.
Solar thermal (hot water): £400.
Photovoltaics (electricity): Maximum of £2,000 for each kilowatt installed.
Wind turbine (electricity): Maximum of £1,000/kw, or 30% of cost.
Micro hydro power (circa 5kw; electricity): Max £1,000/kw or 30% of cost.
Pellet boiler (space/water heat): Max £1,500, or 30% of cost.
· Government grants for pensioners and those on benefits, up to £2,700 for insulation. Councils and energy firm grants also available.
That last bit made it look like it was simply a bit of electioneering until I saw the party to which the MP belonged.
One can see the... a... any government's dilemma. Almost anything designed to encourage going green either involves less revenue (LPG, etc) or forking out.
But I'm sorry, if the prime minister and other ministers are only capable of renewed pledges to extend Britain's action on climate change, but then allow reality on the ground not to catch up,then at best I have to ask what use they are.
And looking at the money doled out (£624k?)to the number of homes (629?) out of all eligible in the UK, I have to wonder how much was spent administering the whole thing.
Any bets on more than has been provided?
As it is of value, I reproduce here the actual grants as outlined. It may still be worth the effort trying:
Ground source heat pump (water/space heat): Maximum of £1,200, or 30% of the total, whichever is lower.
Solar thermal (hot water): £400.
Photovoltaics (electricity): Maximum of £2,000 for each kilowatt installed.
Wind turbine (electricity): Maximum of £1,000/kw, or 30% of cost.
Micro hydro power (circa 5kw; electricity): Max £1,000/kw or 30% of cost.
Pellet boiler (space/water heat): Max £1,500, or 30% of cost.
· Government grants for pensioners and those on benefits, up to £2,700 for insulation. Councils and energy firm grants also available.
GiGo
I was interested (whilst noting it was but one) in this letter in the Indy: Changes to what can be recycled will result in overflowing bins
Here we have a willing and keen recycler essentially turned to the Dark Side by a system that says one thing but makes it very hard to actually do it.
Now our local kerbside system, the RE:box (logo designed by yours truly) does not present such a problem as no plastics are accepted anyway. I matter, I might note, of some irritation to many who think it should (I am prepared to listen to and weigh the ROI and enviROI explanations if and when provided).
Oddly, in the swimming pool carpark next door there is a dirty great skip that will take plastic. However it's a little vague on what exactly, so I give it all I can on the theory that this will encourage better logistical system from cradle to grave to deal with all the options, or at least sensible communications of what is going on and why.
It will be interesting to see whether efforts will be made to help such as me or, as i suspect, vast funds will be applied to 'dealing' with me rather than the waste I am trying to recycle.
The replies she got are equally telling.
'I continue to be amazed at the wide variation in recycling initiatives, which go from the disgustingly paltry to the exemplary. I would be intrigued to learn why there is such a huge disparity in the schemes currently in place across the country. Surely all councils have access to the same recycling technologies?'
'It does seem as though what started out as a good idea to benefit the environment has been taken over by the bureaucrats and turned into a money-saving exercise.'
The last one I think was written by the Indy's editorial dept.
Here we have a willing and keen recycler essentially turned to the Dark Side by a system that says one thing but makes it very hard to actually do it.
Now our local kerbside system, the RE:box (logo designed by yours truly) does not present such a problem as no plastics are accepted anyway. I matter, I might note, of some irritation to many who think it should (I am prepared to listen to and weigh the ROI and enviROI explanations if and when provided).
Oddly, in the swimming pool carpark next door there is a dirty great skip that will take plastic. However it's a little vague on what exactly, so I give it all I can on the theory that this will encourage better logistical system from cradle to grave to deal with all the options, or at least sensible communications of what is going on and why.
It will be interesting to see whether efforts will be made to help such as me or, as i suspect, vast funds will be applied to 'dealing' with me rather than the waste I am trying to recycle.
The replies she got are equally telling.
'I continue to be amazed at the wide variation in recycling initiatives, which go from the disgustingly paltry to the exemplary. I would be intrigued to learn why there is such a huge disparity in the schemes currently in place across the country. Surely all councils have access to the same recycling technologies?'
'It does seem as though what started out as a good idea to benefit the environment has been taken over by the bureaucrats and turned into a money-saving exercise.'
The last one I think was written by the Indy's editorial dept.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Lobby horses
When we at the awards recently (have I mentioned that?) we were give a conducted tour of the two Houses, which are connected by the lobby. This is where you can go an grab your MP and get a word in.
Hence, I guess, the origins of the word 'lobby'. Like most things it seems to have moved on a bit and, like most things, I have mixed feelings.
Nobody can be denied the right to speak their piece and, I guess, if those with a bit more wonga can drum up a few more to express then I guess that's democracy in a capitalist society.
Where I am erring on being put offside is when this has all turned into an industry and money, in some form or other (from withdrawal of support for, say, jobs in a community to unmarked tenners in a brown envelope) is used to effect some influence on a voting pattern.
Of course I'm sop naive to see how this can happen, does happen and is very difficult to police.
So I cranked the old eyebrow on getting this (no link that I could see):
GREENS REVEAL OIL LOBBY INVOLVEMENT IN TORY CONFERENCE
Green Party Principal Speaker Dr. Derek Wall today questioned how
'green' the Tory Party can be given their links to big business,
especially the oil lobby, after it was revealed that the UK Petroleum
Industry are sponsoring a 'Tory Green Initiative' event at the
upcoming Tory conference. (1)
Dr Wall said: "Crucial to any real action on climate change are
polices that will reduce our reliance on fossil based fuels, and so
curb our emissions.
"But this is at odds with the needs of the oil lobby, who rely on our
addiction to oil to keep their profits booming.
"If the government got serious about tackling climate change,
companies like Shell would see a stark drop in their profits.
"How can the Tory party be expected to understand, or even agree with
that premise when they are hob-nobbing with organisations like the UK
Petroleum Industry at their conference?
"UK PIA are sponsoring the Tory Green Initiative dinner at their
forthcoming conference. Chris Hunt, the CEO of PIA will speak
alongside John Gummer, Chairman of the recent Tory Quality of Life
report. (1)
"This comes as no surprise, the Tories have long been the party of
big business,with a soft spot for fossil fuels. Alan Duncan, Shadow
Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform,
worked as a trader of oil and refined products with Shell.
"But it isn't just the Tories whose ability to make policies that
focus on tackling climate change is compromised, the Lib Dems are
also finding it hard going.
"Deputy Leader Vince Cable used to be Chief Economist for the oil
company Shell!"
(1) Please see
Now the thing is, in trying to be objective, I could point out that the Guardian Climate Change Summit was in fact sponsored mainly by Shell. On the one hand yes, you could say at least they were trying to make an effort, or on the other it was just a bit of greenwashing. Thing is, they got slaughtered on the day, so I think we could perhaps allow folk the opportunity to make their own minds up on a sponsor's motives so long as the agenda stays clear and open. Hob-nobbing is fine. Nobbling is not. To deny the former is a silly step too far, and in any case would only encourage the latter to happen behind much darker doors.
Equally, tackling the player and not the ball is also counter-productive. OK, Mr. Cable used to be employed by Shell. Maybe he has 'links'; maybe he does not. It would surely be better to judge him on his actions as a Lib Dem pol than allude to old allegiances in such a vague way.
Hence, I guess, the origins of the word 'lobby'. Like most things it seems to have moved on a bit and, like most things, I have mixed feelings.
Nobody can be denied the right to speak their piece and, I guess, if those with a bit more wonga can drum up a few more to express then I guess that's democracy in a capitalist society.
Where I am erring on being put offside is when this has all turned into an industry and money, in some form or other (from withdrawal of support for, say, jobs in a community to unmarked tenners in a brown envelope) is used to effect some influence on a voting pattern.
Of course I'm sop naive to see how this can happen, does happen and is very difficult to police.
So I cranked the old eyebrow on getting this (no link that I could see):
GREENS REVEAL OIL LOBBY INVOLVEMENT IN TORY CONFERENCE
Green Party Principal Speaker Dr. Derek Wall today questioned how
'green' the Tory Party can be given their links to big business,
especially the oil lobby, after it was revealed that the UK Petroleum
Industry are sponsoring a 'Tory Green Initiative' event at the
upcoming Tory conference. (1)
Dr Wall said: "Crucial to any real action on climate change are
polices that will reduce our reliance on fossil based fuels, and so
curb our emissions.
"But this is at odds with the needs of the oil lobby, who rely on our
addiction to oil to keep their profits booming.
"If the government got serious about tackling climate change,
companies like Shell would see a stark drop in their profits.
"How can the Tory party be expected to understand, or even agree with
that premise when they are hob-nobbing with organisations like the UK
Petroleum Industry at their conference?
"UK PIA are sponsoring the Tory Green Initiative dinner at their
forthcoming conference. Chris Hunt, the CEO of PIA will speak
alongside John Gummer, Chairman of the recent Tory Quality of Life
report. (1)
"This comes as no surprise, the Tories have long been the party of
big business,with a soft spot for fossil fuels. Alan Duncan, Shadow
Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform,
worked as a trader of oil and refined products with Shell.
"But it isn't just the Tories whose ability to make policies that
focus on tackling climate change is compromised, the Lib Dems are
also finding it hard going.
"Deputy Leader Vince Cable used to be Chief Economist for the oil
company Shell!"
(1) Please see
Now the thing is, in trying to be objective, I could point out that the Guardian Climate Change Summit was in fact sponsored mainly by Shell. On the one hand yes, you could say at least they were trying to make an effort, or on the other it was just a bit of greenwashing. Thing is, they got slaughtered on the day, so I think we could perhaps allow folk the opportunity to make their own minds up on a sponsor's motives so long as the agenda stays clear and open. Hob-nobbing is fine. Nobbling is not. To deny the former is a silly step too far, and in any case would only encourage the latter to happen behind much darker doors.
Equally, tackling the player and not the ball is also counter-productive. OK, Mr. Cable used to be employed by Shell. Maybe he has 'links'; maybe he does not. It would surely be better to judge him on his actions as a Lib Dem pol than allude to old allegiances in such a vague way.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Huh?
I might think I know what I know. What I don't know for sure is what I don't know. And with that Rumsfeldian intro I give you this: Clarity on uncertainty
I honestly had trouble getting to grips with it, and I once assembled an IKEA bookcase.
But this is Nature, and there are certain issues raised that I feel I should share in case you lot can make head nor tail of it.
Where I perk up is here: 'Even IPCC scientists have acknowledged that their treatment of uncertainty is "difficult to communicate". Effectively communicating to a wider audience and reaching the level of transparency now being asked of the IPCC will require a careful balancing act.
And, as I think was indicated in the piece as well, have caution on how the doom and gloom gets sold with such enthusiasm, as it kinda sets the cause back when it's shown to have been a tad over-egged.
I still think we need to cut back and stop wasting, though.
And as I am on a balancing act with this post let me share this one, which I was debating bearing in mind the origin (I think they are a bit on the Republican side, so keep that in mind): Are sunspots prime suspects in global warming?
Mainly, I genuinely liked they way they have embraced the term 'climate change optimists', which I have to say is less pejorative in debate. Now if we can find one for those of an equally passionate disposition on the side facing them in many discussions, we might even see a move to more civilized exchanges and possible compromise. With a view to joint action.
OK, it's Friday. A guy can dream.
I honestly had trouble getting to grips with it, and I once assembled an IKEA bookcase.
But this is Nature, and there are certain issues raised that I feel I should share in case you lot can make head nor tail of it.
Where I perk up is here: 'Even IPCC scientists have acknowledged that their treatment of uncertainty is "difficult to communicate". Effectively communicating to a wider audience and reaching the level of transparency now being asked of the IPCC will require a careful balancing act.
And, as I think was indicated in the piece as well, have caution on how the doom and gloom gets sold with such enthusiasm, as it kinda sets the cause back when it's shown to have been a tad over-egged.
I still think we need to cut back and stop wasting, though.
And as I am on a balancing act with this post let me share this one, which I was debating bearing in mind the origin (I think they are a bit on the Republican side, so keep that in mind): Are sunspots prime suspects in global warming?
Mainly, I genuinely liked they way they have embraced the term 'climate change optimists', which I have to say is less pejorative in debate. Now if we can find one for those of an equally passionate disposition on the side facing them in many discussions, we might even see a move to more civilized exchanges and possible compromise. With a view to joint action.
OK, it's Friday. A guy can dream.
Reducing aspirations
As I stare at my Dell LCD screen (Mac mini as CPU), I was attracted of course by this: Green: The New Black - Dell pledges to end carbon emissions by 2008.
"That's clever," I thought, "what are they going to do? Grow 'em?"
Sadly, it was yet another headline to subhead to copy reality check.
But they are boasting about being the first major computer company to become carbon neutral by end 2008. Because it plans to eliminate or offset all of the greenhouse gases it produces worldwide.
Now, as a captain of industry you may not be surprised that I read such worthy tomes as Forbes, but I wasn't too surprised that their greater concern was what it's going to cots, and how the share price will be affected.
I, for one, cannot see anything so terribly bad about computer makers tallying up their "performance per watt," or how much processing power a system can provide while consuming the least amount of power.
But reading on, it seems that scant details about how he hopes to measure the company's green campaign have been provided. Hmmn. Maybe one should talk loudly a bit closer to the time there is something to say might avoid such cynicism?
The Sun Microsystems open-source software program that allows companies to track their carbon emissions sounds fun. I wonder how it works... if it works. Has it got enviROI at its core, for example.
But in ending this seems... sweet. Dell's reforestation program, "Plant a Tree for Me," is now called: "Plant a Forest for Me." That'll do it. I guess 'Steve' from head office (though from his accent I'd say it was Texas) who just called didn't get the memo. He's very keen for me to upgrade to a load new stuff. I wonder if these are grown in the forests?
"That's clever," I thought, "what are they going to do? Grow 'em?"
Sadly, it was yet another headline to subhead to copy reality check.
But they are boasting about being the first major computer company to become carbon neutral by end 2008. Because it plans to eliminate or offset all of the greenhouse gases it produces worldwide.
Now, as a captain of industry you may not be surprised that I read such worthy tomes as Forbes, but I wasn't too surprised that their greater concern was what it's going to cots, and how the share price will be affected.
I, for one, cannot see anything so terribly bad about computer makers tallying up their "performance per watt," or how much processing power a system can provide while consuming the least amount of power.
But reading on, it seems that scant details about how he hopes to measure the company's green campaign have been provided. Hmmn. Maybe one should talk loudly a bit closer to the time there is something to say might avoid such cynicism?
The Sun Microsystems open-source software program that allows companies to track their carbon emissions sounds fun. I wonder how it works... if it works. Has it got enviROI at its core, for example.
But in ending this seems... sweet. Dell's reforestation program, "Plant a Tree for Me," is now called: "Plant a Forest for Me." That'll do it. I guess 'Steve' from head office (though from his accent I'd say it was Texas) who just called didn't get the memo. He's very keen for me to upgrade to a load new stuff. I wonder if these are grown in the forests?
Oh, you are cards
I hate to be ungrateful, but this was a bit too much not to comment upon. See that picture. It's 250 business cards.
I nice compnay had offered me free sample, and when the word gets free I'm you're man.
So when postie knocked on the door I wondered what the big box contained. I remained none the wiser as I encountered the gorgeous laminated box with a huge brochure inside listing printing prices.
And then I found it.
Guys, I love ya to death and AM impressed with the work. But if you are sending stuff out to a company that is trying to save the planet (or anyone else for that matter), I'm sure you can get you message across without quiet such a show of resource .
I nice compnay had offered me free sample, and when the word gets free I'm you're man.
So when postie knocked on the door I wondered what the big box contained. I remained none the wiser as I encountered the gorgeous laminated box with a huge brochure inside listing printing prices.
And then I found it.
Guys, I love ya to death and AM impressed with the work. But if you are sending stuff out to a company that is trying to save the planet (or anyone else for that matter), I'm sure you can get you message across without quiet such a show of resource .
More Directorial input
This just in: WRAP Retail Team restructure
On an equally positive note: WRAP Funded Project Leads to Packaging Savings for Marks & Spencer
By all accounts, it 'can save at least ten per cent of the packaging material used on those products'.
Which must make for a big saving in costs to retailers who are funded to try it.
On an equally positive note: WRAP Funded Project Leads to Packaging Savings for Marks & Spencer
By all accounts, it 'can save at least ten per cent of the packaging material used on those products'.
Which must make for a big saving in costs to retailers who are funded to try it.
How do you lean on balance?
Gosh, this is a tricky one: Legal battle on Gore climate film
On the one hand, if someone said they were/are going to show my boys a film that raises questions on most any topic, especially climate, I'd say 'go for it'. And then, probably forget all about it.
I'll still say it (though we have it in the DVD library downstairs... they were not keen on a night of Daddy's choice in films, sadly), but might now reserve the right to chat with them afterwards. Think of those spoof school videos from the Doug McClure character on the Simpsons. Mayeb with Groundkeeper Willie intoning 'Ye're alll doomed!'.
My first thought is that we've moved on a lot since then. The warnings are still apposite, but the detail is dated. Or, if this from the objector's counsel is to be believed, open to question on some key bases: "Given the serious inaccuracies in the film and the misrepresentations it contains, the film is irredeemable". I'd certainly like to see this pack.
BBC review - 'Most glaring was the pitifully small screentime he gave to solutions'. I know a sequel to correct that (with, fingers crossed, enviROI included) is en route. Maybe it would be better at least to wait?
I wonder what else my kids get shown that has been sent by those who think they should see what they deem 'necessary, and leave it up to a teacher to decide how it gets discussed for balance. The phrase 'can 'o worms' springs to mind.
Brand Republic - Al Gore's environmental campaign appoints global agency
On the one hand, if someone said they were/are going to show my boys a film that raises questions on most any topic, especially climate, I'd say 'go for it'. And then, probably forget all about it.
I'll still say it (though we have it in the DVD library downstairs... they were not keen on a night of Daddy's choice in films, sadly), but might now reserve the right to chat with them afterwards. Think of those spoof school videos from the Doug McClure character on the Simpsons. Mayeb with Groundkeeper Willie intoning 'Ye're alll doomed!'.
My first thought is that we've moved on a lot since then. The warnings are still apposite, but the detail is dated. Or, if this from the objector's counsel is to be believed, open to question on some key bases: "Given the serious inaccuracies in the film and the misrepresentations it contains, the film is irredeemable". I'd certainly like to see this pack.
BBC review - 'Most glaring was the pitifully small screentime he gave to solutions'. I know a sequel to correct that (with, fingers crossed, enviROI included) is en route. Maybe it would be better at least to wait?
I wonder what else my kids get shown that has been sent by those who think they should see what they deem 'necessary, and leave it up to a teacher to decide how it gets discussed for balance. The phrase 'can 'o worms' springs to mind.
Brand Republic - Al Gore's environmental campaign appoints global agency
I'm a celebrity, get me a Green gig!
Rik Mayall stars in green TV campaign for Devon council You know I love choosing the best messenger for the message.
Presumably the perils (to nature) of little 4WD off-roaders didn't feature.
Presumably the perils (to nature) of little 4WD off-roaders didn't feature.
Now, who can we commission to look into this?
Consultancies 'more interested in billable hours' than expertise
Excuse me, I'm still rolling around on the floor.
Excuse me, I'm still rolling around on the floor.
AWARD - Future Friendly - November 30th
WHEN: Friday November 30th
WHAT: The Future Friendly Awards?
WHAT... MORE?: They are looking for people who have promoted sustainable living. An individual can only nominate themselves or a group or project that they are involved in for a Future Friendly Award.
HOW MUCH: Free!
URL: http://futurefriendly.co.uk/whatIs.php
COMMENTS: If you qualify... why not? I'm in!
WHAT: The Future Friendly Awards?
WHAT... MORE?: They are looking for people who have promoted sustainable living. An individual can only nominate themselves or a group or project that they are involved in for a Future Friendly Award.
HOW MUCH: Free!
URL: http://futurefriendly.co.uk/whatIs.php
COMMENTS: If you qualify... why not? I'm in!
It's a 'why not'?
I just had an email through headed 'Be Future Friendly'. Sounded a bit of a demand so I almost didn't open it, but curiosity got the better of me.
It's from one of those myriad initiatives that get issued almost daily, though this one is commercial in origin. So far, so what.
Well, it has a widget that you can download to get daily tips. I had a quick gander and thought it was more a 'why not?', as the first one was about water saving. Now I almost clicked off when it started by pushing one of those things you can buy for the cistern, but it saved itself by adding that a water bottle did the exact same thing (and didn't involve money of more plastic).
So, like the tips I get from such as the FoE daily, I'll now be getting these too. If there are any of note I'll pass them on.
ps: As a technonumpty the one thing I really don't like is how these downloads work. Yes, it allowed for a Mac in the deal... yay! But did what I get look like what I was told I'd get? Noooo. And to now I don't even know if it's working. I guess we'll see tomorrow.
Two wrongs
I don't seek to excuse those who may not be doing as well as they could, or should, by pointing at those who are doing worse, but this is worth looking at so long as it's in objective terms: Kyoto participants under reporting emissions
With the caveat it's a blog I read via another blog (and some of the links seem to drop in and out), so take the opinion as provided by the source, but there are links worth checking.
In particular, it seems counter-productive to bash the USA, and Bush in particular, especially when some do so using information that is plain wrong... or at least selective. You know what happens when you back anyone into a corner... especially sleeping giants that can get filled with terrible resolves.
Surely better to get to a more integrated, inclusive approach asap. Sadly I think those who see their mission (and funding/careers, etc) more in the confrontation zone will prevail.
With the caveat it's a blog I read via another blog (and some of the links seem to drop in and out), so take the opinion as provided by the source, but there are links worth checking.
In particular, it seems counter-productive to bash the USA, and Bush in particular, especially when some do so using information that is plain wrong... or at least selective. You know what happens when you back anyone into a corner... especially sleeping giants that can get filled with terrible resolves.
Surely better to get to a more integrated, inclusive approach asap. Sadly I think those who see their mission (and funding/careers, etc) more in the confrontation zone will prevail.
You're nicked. Maybe.
I am not big on some aspects of the law. Often what is obvious and/or 'fair' gets short shrift as the letter is deemed to trump the spirit, often where fines are involved.
So I was a bit confused when I heard a report on BBC Breakfast News (link coming later I hope) about the latest issuance from our dear leaders, and was moved to write in (and featured in part):
I haven't read the new Highway Code. Am I required to?
I also don't smoke, but can see how a burning, smoke-emitting stick could be a distraction whilst driving.
But how on earth 'may' this be a reason for police to deem it a reason to prosecute for dangerous driving?
It surely 'is' or 'isn't' illegal. Which is it?
Such vagueness makes a mockery of the law.
I've just watched another Minister of Mendacity waffle away, but again thanks to a National Government/Broadcaster combo remain none the wiser on my question.
How on earth can society proceed when we have all these 'things' that 'may' be a reason to prosecute in existence and being added to constantly without honest admission by the sorry crew who conjure these things up.
This clown (why do we pay for people who contribute nothing but obfuscation?) seemed to be saying that if you were not holding the wheel at 1o to 2 you are on the way to being dodgy. So... changing gear? I guess we'll all need automatics. Glancing in the mirror? Better to stare straight ahead.
Indy - Expanded Highway Code tells learners to drive with courtesy
So I was a bit confused when I heard a report on BBC Breakfast News (link coming later I hope) about the latest issuance from our dear leaders, and was moved to write in (and featured in part):
I haven't read the new Highway Code. Am I required to?
I also don't smoke, but can see how a burning, smoke-emitting stick could be a distraction whilst driving.
But how on earth 'may' this be a reason for police to deem it a reason to prosecute for dangerous driving?
It surely 'is' or 'isn't' illegal. Which is it?
Such vagueness makes a mockery of the law.
I've just watched another Minister of Mendacity waffle away, but again thanks to a National Government/Broadcaster combo remain none the wiser on my question.
How on earth can society proceed when we have all these 'things' that 'may' be a reason to prosecute in existence and being added to constantly without honest admission by the sorry crew who conjure these things up.
This clown (why do we pay for people who contribute nothing but obfuscation?) seemed to be saying that if you were not holding the wheel at 1o to 2 you are on the way to being dodgy. So... changing gear? I guess we'll all need automatics. Glancing in the mirror? Better to stare straight ahead.
Indy - Expanded Highway Code tells learners to drive with courtesy
2p or not 2p
I just got a call to sign another petition; this time on petrol: Vote to stop 2.35p extra tax on fuel next week
Fuel hikes are a fact of life, and frankly I am most likely to shrug and absorb the things. I doubt I'll sign this petition (unlike the road pricing one), at least on the reasons stated.
My main thought is to wonder what the money is going towards.
Also, in this will 'e/won't 'e 'election fever' (well, in the Westminster Village) period, how it will play outside of London where some voters still drive because they have to, not want to sit on the M5 each day for an hour each day.
Fuel hikes are a fact of life, and frankly I am most likely to shrug and absorb the things. I doubt I'll sign this petition (unlike the road pricing one), at least on the reasons stated.
My main thought is to wonder what the money is going towards.
Also, in this will 'e/won't 'e 'election fever' (well, in the Westminster Village) period, how it will play outside of London where some voters still drive because they have to, not want to sit on the M5 each day for an hour each day.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Don't have a cow, man
Go back to your roots
Personally I'd do a little bit less predatory award-prowling via cheap and easy negative (which is what I think most 'Charity' ads are grasping for in blowing budgets) executions and try and earn one's keep (and maybe make a difference) by selling the positives.
The PETA ad is on the way, but personally I'd need to be persuaded that not succumbing to the exhortations of Beefy and Lamby did not involve a cow's exhaust (I believe it's their burps that are the culprit) when thinking of food, eating nut cutlets and being a shrew. Being married to a Chinese wok-mistress I know it can work when the option is served up in a way to make me actually want to bite.
There's also the small recognition that nature made most of us omnivores. So one needs to work with the design constraint rather than ignoring it.
ps: reuse and not cutting down forests in the first place are much better than recycling or planting trees if you're not into the reduction thing, in which case also try insulation, insulation, insulation. Trust me, I work with Junkk.com, and they know all about waste and rubbish ideas when they see 'em.
Personally I'd do a little bit less predatory award-prowling via cheap and easy negative (which is what I think most 'Charity' ads are grasping for in blowing budgets) executions and try and earn one's keep (and maybe make a difference) by selling the positives.
The PETA ad is on the way, but personally I'd need to be persuaded that not succumbing to the exhortations of Beefy and Lamby did not involve a cow's exhaust (I believe it's their burps that are the culprit) when thinking of food, eating nut cutlets and being a shrew. Being married to a Chinese wok-mistress I know it can work when the option is served up in a way to make me actually want to bite.
There's also the small recognition that nature made most of us omnivores. So one needs to work with the design constraint rather than ignoring it.
ps: reuse and not cutting down forests in the first place are much better than recycling or planting trees if you're not into the reduction thing, in which case also try insulation, insulation, insulation. Trust me, I work with Junkk.com, and they know all about waste and rubbish ideas when they see 'em.
Show me where the money goes
Nothing like an opportunity to air the notion of enviROI as a worthy measure of an initiative's actual value to the planet: No lectures from Tesco
So when Tesco was advertised as funding green efforts to the tune of £25M we took note of those who took note.
I think first one has to get past the notions of supermarkets being part of 'the' problem. Whatever they are, they are here to stay, so that aspect of the discussion seems unproductive. And, as again evidenced here, there seems to be a requirement that you either in a pro or anti camp at the extremities. No middle ground allowed.
The question to me is what is going to be done with/for the money, and will it be worth what's spent... and in what terms. My kids' futures? Or other benefits less connected to that (to me) essential aim.
So I look forward to more consideration on these whenever anyone feels ready.
So when Tesco was advertised as funding green efforts to the tune of £25M we took note of those who took note.
I think first one has to get past the notions of supermarkets being part of 'the' problem. Whatever they are, they are here to stay, so that aspect of the discussion seems unproductive. And, as again evidenced here, there seems to be a requirement that you either in a pro or anti camp at the extremities. No middle ground allowed.
The question to me is what is going to be done with/for the money, and will it be worth what's spent... and in what terms. My kids' futures? Or other benefits less connected to that (to me) essential aim.
So I look forward to more consideration on these whenever anyone feels ready.
Plus ca (climate) change
Yay! Another one: Bush hosts climate change talks
Representatives from Australia, Britain, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa and the US will attend.
I wonder who? Or they all not attending each other's meetings these days to avoid actually doing anything? The Gordon Swerve approach, it seems, from tinpot dictators to balls of fire. Bet he'd be there in a heartbeat if it was Jose's 'The Special One Returns' gig. That's when you really need to know one's leader is on the case.
Dilbert, as ever, nails it.
Grist seems to agree - You Really Can't Have Too Many Meetings
Or have another - Treehugger - Reporting Live From the Clinton Global Initiative
Guardian - Europeans angry after Bush climate speech 'charade'
Guardian - Untransparent charity - 'There was a pretty fundamental problem with the third annual Clinton Global Initiative: the lack of transparency.' Hmmmn.
BBC - Bush climate plans spark debate
Economist - Warming to the environment? - 'Countries that did not openly criticise America’s stance seemed to be sending a message through the loftiness of the representatives that they sent to the respective get-togethers. Whereas the UN’s meeting had been overrun by presidents, prime ministers and even the odd monarch, Mr Bush was only able to entice ministers, advisers and bureaucrats to his. A vice-minister of state led China’s delegation. Italy sent someone with the title “sous-sherpa” Two of the 17 delegations showed up late for the opening session'
AWARD - Saatchi World Changing Ideas Award
This is from the always worth subscribing to and reading (if you're creatively inclined), creativematch:
WHEN: Due tomorrow!
WHAT: World Changing Ideas Award
WHAT... MORE?: The global award, formerly known as the Saatchi & Saatchi Award for Innovation in Communication, is made biennially by Saatchi & Saatchi. The Award attracts an incredibly broad range of entries and was created to recognise brilliant thinking, to bring it to the world’s attention and to reward the most outstanding innovation with a prize worth $100,000. Submissions are welcome from innovators around the world, from individuals, academic institutions, charitable foundations and companies, right up to global corporations.
Ideas may be scientific, linguistic, artistic, technological. They may be hi-tech, lo-tech or no-tech. Ideas may be in prototype, the finished thing or merely a compelling concept.
HOW MUCH: Free!
URL: http://www.saatchi.com/worldwide/innovation_award.asp
COMMENTS: Ahhh... the downside. This award is deadlined tomorrow, yet was advised of and broadcast by a major creative site yesterday. And getting through to the awards site is a challenge in itself, as is the site. A lot of Flash between you and the info you need. And having expressed interest.... nothing. I have tried to email and call, but no one is getting back. I actually think it is a test of persistence pretending to be a competition.
But for even a sniff at $100k I'll give it my best shot:)
ADDENDUM 11.15am 28/09 - Well, persistence pays. I have tracked down a person, Norma Clark, on 0207 636 5060, at S&S, who is the coordinator. Didn't get her of course, but a nice young lady is sending me a pack. Leaving me... not very long.
WHEN: Due tomorrow!
WHAT: World Changing Ideas Award
WHAT... MORE?: The global award, formerly known as the Saatchi & Saatchi Award for Innovation in Communication, is made biennially by Saatchi & Saatchi. The Award attracts an incredibly broad range of entries and was created to recognise brilliant thinking, to bring it to the world’s attention and to reward the most outstanding innovation with a prize worth $100,000. Submissions are welcome from innovators around the world, from individuals, academic institutions, charitable foundations and companies, right up to global corporations.
Ideas may be scientific, linguistic, artistic, technological. They may be hi-tech, lo-tech or no-tech. Ideas may be in prototype, the finished thing or merely a compelling concept.
HOW MUCH: Free!
URL: http://www.saatchi.com/worldwide/innovation_award.asp
COMMENTS: Ahhh... the downside. This award is deadlined tomorrow, yet was advised of and broadcast by a major creative site yesterday. And getting through to the awards site is a challenge in itself, as is the site. A lot of Flash between you and the info you need. And having expressed interest.... nothing. I have tried to email and call, but no one is getting back. I actually think it is a test of persistence pretending to be a competition.
But for even a sniff at $100k I'll give it my best shot:)
ADDENDUM 11.15am 28/09 - Well, persistence pays. I have tracked down a person, Norma Clark, on 0207 636 5060, at S&S, who is the coordinator. Didn't get her of course, but a nice young lady is sending me a pack. Leaving me... not very long.
Strike a light 2
Just had this from HMG: Energy guzzling lightbulbs phase out to start next year
And why not indeed?
I do however note this '... will start disappearing from shop shelves...' is followed by the words 'voluntary initiative', so fingers crossed. It's major 'DO' I can only see as significant.
And while Mr. Been is right to point out that 'there are many more energy hungry gadgets on sale in shops that waste too much energy', it's perhaps not just for those he mentioned to take action alone.
And while on energy saving light bulb 'can' last up to 10 times longer than a non-efficient version, I think the public needs to have more in support of ensuring what they are told is what is delivered.
The rest of the piece has the same thing said about six similar ways by various talking heads, so it's nice to know our money isn't wasted on make-weights. I reprint the most useful Editor's notes here (with a few of my own on them):
1. The Government has proposed, as an illustrative schedule for the phase out of inefficient lamps, that retailers might want to follow:
* By January 2008, cease replacing stock of all inefficient (General Lighting Service, GLS) A-shaped incandescent lamps of energy rating higher than 100W (predominantly 150W lamps).
* By January 2009, cease selling all inefficient GLS A-shaped lamps of energy rating higher than 60W (predominantly 150W lamps, 100W lamps, plus some 75W lamps)
* By January 2010, cease selling all GLS A-shaped lamps of efficacy of energy rating higher than 40W (predominantly 60W lamps)
* By 31 December 2011, cease selling all remaining inefficient GLS A-shaped lamps and 60W "candle" and "golfball" lamps. (predominantly 40W and 25W A-shaped GLS bulbs, and 60W candles and golfballs).
At the moment, candles and golfballs, tungsten halogen lamps and lamps supplied with non-lighting electrical appliances are expected to remain on sale, because suitable energy-efficient alternatives do not currently exist. Really? I have eco-versions of almost all mentioned here.
2. The following retailers support this initiative: ASDA, B&Q, The Co-operative Group, Home Retail Group (Argos and Homebase), IKEA, John Lewis, Marks & Spencer, Morrisons, Sainsbury's, Somerfield, Tesco, Waitrose, Wickes, Woolworths, British Retail Consortium, Association of Convenience Stores and the British Hardware Federation. It is also being promoted (how?) through the major energy companies as part of their activities through the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT).
6. Defra launched its ActOnCO2 carbon calculator http://www.direct.gov.uk/actonco2 as a public trial version on 20 June. There have been over 300,000 visits so far. That's less than we get in 3 months... after how much spent? And what is a 'visit'? And what actaul enviROI+ result over a box ticked did the planet gain for the money?
Indy - Benn announces phasing out of all high-energy bulbs
Guardian - Lights out for traditional bulbs by 2012 - You heard it here, well, 3rd
Guardian - Ban the bulb? - Of more interest
More power to you (excuse the pun).
However, I would also like to flag up the not so small matter of long-life as well as low-energy. A lot of consumers are, not surprisingly, failing to see these as often mutually exclusive, though obviously complementary.
I know from personal experience the perils of being seduced by a price that is 'too good to be true' and seeing the thing go pop way before lifespan.
The best thing I've found is to keep receipts and note the installation date on the base. Few retailers can argue with this in seeking a replacement.
I think this from Grist is worth a giggle at the 'efforts' of this government and its minsters:
Socket to Us
Britain will phase out incandescent light bulbs
Britain announced a voluntary initiative today that will phase out traditional incandescent light bulbs in the country by 2011. Officials predict that phasing in compact fluorescent lights will keep up to 5.5 million tons of carbon dioxide a year out of the atmosphere. Brilliant! "Britain is leading the way in getting rid of energy-guzzling light bulbs and helping consumers reduce their carbon footprint," said Environment Secretary Hilary Benn, apparently forgetting that Australia actually led the way (and its legislation was mandatory, cough cough.) Could the U.S. be next to see the light?
Guardian - How long will they fob us off with lightbulbs?
Interesting to read this and then pop over to an article and see what one Labour MP has had to say about the 'success' of the grants system.
My question is what are the costs of administering these schemes vs. the amounts actually committed to DOING anything that makes a tangible difference.
Indy Letters - Worries about low-energy bulbs
Why not encourage manufacturers to develop more energy-efficient bulbs? General Electric, for instance, announced that it will release an improved incandescent bulb in 2009.
I'd nver really thought of the mercury aspect. The GE initiative looks interesting.
Indy - More on
And why not indeed?
I do however note this '... will start disappearing from shop shelves...' is followed by the words 'voluntary initiative', so fingers crossed. It's major 'DO' I can only see as significant.
And while Mr. Been is right to point out that 'there are many more energy hungry gadgets on sale in shops that waste too much energy', it's perhaps not just for those he mentioned to take action alone.
And while on energy saving light bulb 'can' last up to 10 times longer than a non-efficient version, I think the public needs to have more in support of ensuring what they are told is what is delivered.
The rest of the piece has the same thing said about six similar ways by various talking heads, so it's nice to know our money isn't wasted on make-weights. I reprint the most useful Editor's notes here (with a few of my own on them):
1. The Government has proposed, as an illustrative schedule for the phase out of inefficient lamps, that retailers might want to follow:
* By January 2008, cease replacing stock of all inefficient (General Lighting Service, GLS) A-shaped incandescent lamps of energy rating higher than 100W (predominantly 150W lamps).
* By January 2009, cease selling all inefficient GLS A-shaped lamps of energy rating higher than 60W (predominantly 150W lamps, 100W lamps, plus some 75W lamps)
* By January 2010, cease selling all GLS A-shaped lamps of efficacy of energy rating higher than 40W (predominantly 60W lamps)
* By 31 December 2011, cease selling all remaining inefficient GLS A-shaped lamps and 60W "candle" and "golfball" lamps. (predominantly 40W and 25W A-shaped GLS bulbs, and 60W candles and golfballs).
At the moment, candles and golfballs, tungsten halogen lamps and lamps supplied with non-lighting electrical appliances are expected to remain on sale, because suitable energy-efficient alternatives do not currently exist. Really? I have eco-versions of almost all mentioned here.
2. The following retailers support this initiative: ASDA, B&Q, The Co-operative Group, Home Retail Group (Argos and Homebase), IKEA, John Lewis, Marks & Spencer, Morrisons, Sainsbury's, Somerfield, Tesco, Waitrose, Wickes, Woolworths, British Retail Consortium, Association of Convenience Stores and the British Hardware Federation. It is also being promoted (how?) through the major energy companies as part of their activities through the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT).
6. Defra launched its ActOnCO2 carbon calculator http://www.direct.gov.uk/actonco2 as a public trial version on 20 June. There have been over 300,000 visits so far. That's less than we get in 3 months... after how much spent? And what is a 'visit'? And what actaul enviROI+ result over a box ticked did the planet gain for the money?
Indy - Benn announces phasing out of all high-energy bulbs
Guardian - Lights out for traditional bulbs by 2012 - You heard it here, well, 3rd
Guardian - Ban the bulb? - Of more interest
More power to you (excuse the pun).
However, I would also like to flag up the not so small matter of long-life as well as low-energy. A lot of consumers are, not surprisingly, failing to see these as often mutually exclusive, though obviously complementary.
I know from personal experience the perils of being seduced by a price that is 'too good to be true' and seeing the thing go pop way before lifespan.
The best thing I've found is to keep receipts and note the installation date on the base. Few retailers can argue with this in seeking a replacement.
I think this from Grist is worth a giggle at the 'efforts' of this government and its minsters:
Socket to Us
Britain will phase out incandescent light bulbs
Britain announced a voluntary initiative today that will phase out traditional incandescent light bulbs in the country by 2011. Officials predict that phasing in compact fluorescent lights will keep up to 5.5 million tons of carbon dioxide a year out of the atmosphere. Brilliant! "Britain is leading the way in getting rid of energy-guzzling light bulbs and helping consumers reduce their carbon footprint," said Environment Secretary Hilary Benn, apparently forgetting that Australia actually led the way (and its legislation was mandatory, cough cough.) Could the U.S. be next to see the light?
Guardian - How long will they fob us off with lightbulbs?
Interesting to read this and then pop over to an article and see what one Labour MP has had to say about the 'success' of the grants system.
My question is what are the costs of administering these schemes vs. the amounts actually committed to DOING anything that makes a tangible difference.
Indy Letters - Worries about low-energy bulbs
Why not encourage manufacturers to develop more energy-efficient bulbs? General Electric, for instance, announced that it will release an improved incandescent bulb in 2009.
I'd nver really thought of the mercury aspect. The GE initiative looks interesting.
Indy - More on
BLOG ENHANCEMENTS
Well, I hope you will feel that's the case!
I pretty much live on this blog. For one thing there's a lot coming in each minute to comment upon, but also Google has a wadge of wonga to throw around that has made its interface really, really... really easy. And new toys appear weekly. Pictures, audio, polls...
Sadly, while Junkk.com's main site is a design masterpiece, its back-end is steam driven, and until I get help I am sadly leaving a lot that could and should be up there for when I can afford or get supported with help to post the HTML bits to help make what I write look as spiffy there as it can here.
And as I write blog posts, I've just realised that all manner of stuff comes in. Press releases, competitions, conference advisories, etc. And to now I have tended to file away and hope to get to them... which I usually don't.
So I am planning now to create categorise and forms on this blog that reflect the simple facts I have been given so they are at least posted and shared in a timely manner.
I doubt there will be much by way of commentary, but you know I can't resist the odd thought (and they can be very odd). But, as always, I would caution viewing such things always very much 'as supplied'.
These will be filed in the post labels using a selection of the main site categories as follows Junkk - [Category], usually with the name and a few other useful pointers attached to help if you are searching.
Hope it works and is useful. The tastier ones will also get an outing in the newsletter, when I get round to that!
ps: And if anyone would like to help me get the on-site archive up-to-date and usefully in complement, feel free to get in touch!
ADDENDUM:
What would be a BIG HELP would be to use our templates to help me help you if you'd like your PR to go up quickly. Here's one for EVENTS (there are others for AWARDS, etc, on site):
MONTH -
FIELD: Enviro, Biz, AD, etc
WHEN: Date, time
WHAT: Event title
WHAT... MORE?: A few more key details
WHERE: Postcode is always helpful to search
WHO: Speakers (Note: Here at Junkk we also do weddings, Bar Mizvahs:)
HOW: Much. We prefer free, naturally.
URL: Your www. here
COMMENTS: This is for us... we know things
I pretty much live on this blog. For one thing there's a lot coming in each minute to comment upon, but also Google has a wadge of wonga to throw around that has made its interface really, really... really easy. And new toys appear weekly. Pictures, audio, polls...
Sadly, while Junkk.com's main site is a design masterpiece, its back-end is steam driven, and until I get help I am sadly leaving a lot that could and should be up there for when I can afford or get supported with help to post the HTML bits to help make what I write look as spiffy there as it can here.
And as I write blog posts, I've just realised that all manner of stuff comes in. Press releases, competitions, conference advisories, etc. And to now I have tended to file away and hope to get to them... which I usually don't.
So I am planning now to create categorise and forms on this blog that reflect the simple facts I have been given so they are at least posted and shared in a timely manner.
I doubt there will be much by way of commentary, but you know I can't resist the odd thought (and they can be very odd). But, as always, I would caution viewing such things always very much 'as supplied'.
These will be filed in the post labels using a selection of the main site categories as follows Junkk - [Category], usually with the name and a few other useful pointers attached to help if you are searching.
Hope it works and is useful. The tastier ones will also get an outing in the newsletter, when I get round to that!
ps: And if anyone would like to help me get the on-site archive up-to-date and usefully in complement, feel free to get in touch!
ADDENDUM:
What would be a BIG HELP would be to use our templates to help me help you if you'd like your PR to go up quickly. Here's one for EVENTS (there are others for AWARDS, etc, on site):
MONTH -
FIELD: Enviro, Biz, AD, etc
WHEN: Date, time
WHAT: Event title
WHAT... MORE?: A few more key details
WHERE: Postcode is always helpful to search
WHO: Speakers (Note: Here at Junkk we also do weddings, Bar Mizvahs:)
HOW: Much. We prefer free, naturally.
URL: Your www. here
COMMENTS: This is for us... we know things
CONFERENCE - Biofuels, Newark Notts, 17-18 Oct
MONTH - Next
FIELD: Enviro-related
WHEN: 17-18 Oct, time N/K
WHAT: NEW HOLLAND SPONSORS THE 2007 BIOFUELS CONFERENCE
WHAT... MORE?: A presentation on the role of biofuels in agriculture. A display
of the brand's products will feature prominently outside the
venue, showing a selection of New Holland machinery that can
run on 100% biodiesel, while a team of specialists will be on
hand to give delegates the latest information on the use of
biodiesel in agricultural equipment.
WHERE: Newark, Notts
WHO: N/K
HOW: N/K
URL: www.newholland.com
COMMENTS: It's a sponsored event, so a caution on objectivity
This is posted 'as provided' as a new blog feature.
FIELD: Enviro-related
WHEN: 17-18 Oct, time N/K
WHAT: NEW HOLLAND SPONSORS THE 2007 BIOFUELS CONFERENCE
WHAT... MORE?: A presentation on the role of biofuels in agriculture. A display
of the brand's products will feature prominently outside the
venue, showing a selection of New Holland machinery that can
run on 100% biodiesel, while a team of specialists will be on
hand to give delegates the latest information on the use of
biodiesel in agricultural equipment.
WHERE: Newark, Notts
WHO: N/K
HOW: N/K
URL: www.newholland.com
COMMENTS: It's a sponsored event, so a caution on objectivity
This is posted 'as provided' as a new blog feature.
Who's in charge
I am personally uninspired and professionally constrained enough to have no real political affiliations, such that my greater allegiance is to the Currently Can't Reasonably Really Abide Any Party Party.
However, I do care a lot on how we are run, and those who would claim to be doing so. Which means currently there is one mob more than any other in my sights. As has been noted here before, it's a lot more effective to be in power and doing than out of it and talking. Especially to those of us lacking in patience on certain issues.
So, even though it was naught to do with the environment, I felt motivated to weigh in a tad having seen a Newsnight the other night that left me less than impressed with our Government and national broadcaster: British investment in Burma
As this 'discussion' 'unfurls' (or, possibly more accurately, oozes to oblivion), I am I supposed to be getting nearer to some clue to what's going on? If so that's no thanks to the Political Leadership of this country or the national broadcaster. What a team!
If this is how we are being represented at government level in matters of explanation and negotiation involving Foreign Affairs I think I'd best start building a bunker. And if this is how the competence of those entrusted with our country's future are to be effectively challenged to explain themselves, I guess I'll... um... what can I do, again?
Other than the half dozen left or so who might be so inclined to look back in archive, this whole mess will be lost, leaving any with some memory of the original exchange still in deep confusion and disappointment.
Whatever happened to professionalism? We had a pol who could barley restrain his loathing of all in front of him (beside camera and at 'tother end) as inconveniences to the grand plan (Version 2. Version 1 now deleted, and WE MUST NOT FORGET IT), and a celebrity interviewer who could barely restrain his loathing of that fact.
Sorry, no, that’s wrong. Neither did restrain anything, barely or otherwise. Save getting and offering enlightenment on topic.
They just let egos rip, with truth and clarity and respect for the electorate and viewership flying out of the window. And I bet now the principals can blame various unidentified minions for letting them down, and the whole thing can whizz off on a distracting tangent leaving the actual issue unaddressed and many questions hanging. Way to go guys!
Is this how we are now to be (micro)managed? An authority figure appears on air and appears to know nothing and commit to less. Then a spat ensues that solves nothing, leaving us to be drip fed undebated sound bites subsequently, to pick up on a website if we can find them?
And while I find it hard to imagine how a few score of those who do stay with such as these blog pages can really be worth the effort, it is proving a trial trying to pick around the stuff that is getting lobbed in here by the spinners at the expense of some worthy comment and attempt at debate.
There are what could be press releases drafted by spin doctors on both sides, masquerading as ‘Joe Public', and now a new quirk, the spoiler. These are the quite frankly bizarre ramblings that are either designed to discredit one side (by association) or the other (by being too obviously designed that way). Or, most likely, simply the process. Sadly this is a moderated blog's (and I recognise the necessity here) greatest weakness. I'm now seeing those who would seek to deliberately get moderated just to raise doubts as to the objectivity of the totality.
Are we really at a point where those theoretically in charge and/or representative of our interests are so irrelevant in comparison to those we can’t see (or vote for/against)? Especially when they see their mission as being to pull any strings necessary to have things simply being seen to be done as they see fit?
While of some value, that's why blogs (and most editable print) can never compare to live, streamed, noddy-free broadcast. Until now. As all parties seem to have found a way to render even this meaningless.
Sad.
BBC - Newsnight - Online analysis
Reading my previous post, looking at what happened subsequently (not much) I reckon I was not far off.
Interesting. A full six posts since Thursday at time of writing (Saturday pm - assuming this makes it), and one set are duplicates.
The country's Foreign Minister and one of the more significant broadcast interviewer/celebs on one of the few significant national broadcast news shows pretty much lock horns on key matters of fact and the viewer at the time is left bewildered as to what is going on and who knows and/or is doing what.
But fear not, all is to be clarified later on the website.
Now I know out of 60Million there are only so many who can vote and/or care about the state of the country and/or stay up that late (or catch it next day online) to watch a news show, and only a fraction of that audience care enough for sometimes a good 20 to pile in and engage on a blog.
But out of so many protagonists, 5 viewers so far on the only discussion board about the follow-up would seems to indicate that, as media milestones go, it surely ain't that great a poster child for politics or the way it gets reported upon and/or viewed these days.
However, I do care a lot on how we are run, and those who would claim to be doing so. Which means currently there is one mob more than any other in my sights. As has been noted here before, it's a lot more effective to be in power and doing than out of it and talking. Especially to those of us lacking in patience on certain issues.
So, even though it was naught to do with the environment, I felt motivated to weigh in a tad having seen a Newsnight the other night that left me less than impressed with our Government and national broadcaster: British investment in Burma
As this 'discussion' 'unfurls' (or, possibly more accurately, oozes to oblivion), I am I supposed to be getting nearer to some clue to what's going on? If so that's no thanks to the Political Leadership of this country or the national broadcaster. What a team!
If this is how we are being represented at government level in matters of explanation and negotiation involving Foreign Affairs I think I'd best start building a bunker. And if this is how the competence of those entrusted with our country's future are to be effectively challenged to explain themselves, I guess I'll... um... what can I do, again?
Other than the half dozen left or so who might be so inclined to look back in archive, this whole mess will be lost, leaving any with some memory of the original exchange still in deep confusion and disappointment.
Whatever happened to professionalism? We had a pol who could barley restrain his loathing of all in front of him (beside camera and at 'tother end) as inconveniences to the grand plan (Version 2. Version 1 now deleted, and WE MUST NOT FORGET IT), and a celebrity interviewer who could barely restrain his loathing of that fact.
Sorry, no, that’s wrong. Neither did restrain anything, barely or otherwise. Save getting and offering enlightenment on topic.
They just let egos rip, with truth and clarity and respect for the electorate and viewership flying out of the window. And I bet now the principals can blame various unidentified minions for letting them down, and the whole thing can whizz off on a distracting tangent leaving the actual issue unaddressed and many questions hanging. Way to go guys!
Is this how we are now to be (micro)managed? An authority figure appears on air and appears to know nothing and commit to less. Then a spat ensues that solves nothing, leaving us to be drip fed undebated sound bites subsequently, to pick up on a website if we can find them?
And while I find it hard to imagine how a few score of those who do stay with such as these blog pages can really be worth the effort, it is proving a trial trying to pick around the stuff that is getting lobbed in here by the spinners at the expense of some worthy comment and attempt at debate.
There are what could be press releases drafted by spin doctors on both sides, masquerading as ‘Joe Public', and now a new quirk, the spoiler. These are the quite frankly bizarre ramblings that are either designed to discredit one side (by association) or the other (by being too obviously designed that way). Or, most likely, simply the process. Sadly this is a moderated blog's (and I recognise the necessity here) greatest weakness. I'm now seeing those who would seek to deliberately get moderated just to raise doubts as to the objectivity of the totality.
Are we really at a point where those theoretically in charge and/or representative of our interests are so irrelevant in comparison to those we can’t see (or vote for/against)? Especially when they see their mission as being to pull any strings necessary to have things simply being seen to be done as they see fit?
While of some value, that's why blogs (and most editable print) can never compare to live, streamed, noddy-free broadcast. Until now. As all parties seem to have found a way to render even this meaningless.
Sad.
BBC - Newsnight - Online analysis
Reading my previous post, looking at what happened subsequently (not much) I reckon I was not far off.
Interesting. A full six posts since Thursday at time of writing (Saturday pm - assuming this makes it), and one set are duplicates.
The country's Foreign Minister and one of the more significant broadcast interviewer/celebs on one of the few significant national broadcast news shows pretty much lock horns on key matters of fact and the viewer at the time is left bewildered as to what is going on and who knows and/or is doing what.
But fear not, all is to be clarified later on the website.
Now I know out of 60Million there are only so many who can vote and/or care about the state of the country and/or stay up that late (or catch it next day online) to watch a news show, and only a fraction of that audience care enough for sometimes a good 20 to pile in and engage on a blog.
But out of so many protagonists, 5 viewers so far on the only discussion board about the follow-up would seems to indicate that, as media milestones go, it surely ain't that great a poster child for politics or the way it gets reported upon and/or viewed these days.
A pipe dream?
..... or a possible means of fixing more CO2 out of the atmosphere?
Following on from the iron filings idea, this from James Lovelock and Chris Rapley suggests building hundreds of thousands of massive vertical pipes in the oceans. Each pipe would have a one way valve at the bottom so that wave action near the top would draw nutrient rich water up from the ocean depths, providing a spur to more algal growth, which it turn will fix more CO2 from the atmosphere.
The full article is reported in New Scientist.
Just one little snaglet might be the fact that "as well as being rich in nutrients, water rising up the pipes will be rich in carbon - this could mean CO2 is released into the atmosphere."
Oh well, it sounded like a good idea at first.
ADDENDUM (from Junkk Male) - Guardian - How sea tubes could slow climate change
Yes, I suppose they 'could'. But as mans's meddling with nature is not quite working out at a success rate that's enviable, maybe it's more down to whether they 'should'.
TELEGRAPH - James Lovelock's plan to pump ocean water to stop climate change
Following on from the iron filings idea, this from James Lovelock and Chris Rapley suggests building hundreds of thousands of massive vertical pipes in the oceans. Each pipe would have a one way valve at the bottom so that wave action near the top would draw nutrient rich water up from the ocean depths, providing a spur to more algal growth, which it turn will fix more CO2 from the atmosphere.
The full article is reported in New Scientist.
Just one little snaglet might be the fact that "as well as being rich in nutrients, water rising up the pipes will be rich in carbon - this could mean CO2 is released into the atmosphere."
Oh well, it sounded like a good idea at first.
ADDENDUM (from Junkk Male) - Guardian - How sea tubes could slow climate change
Yes, I suppose they 'could'. But as mans's meddling with nature is not quite working out at a success rate that's enviable, maybe it's more down to whether they 'should'.
TELEGRAPH - James Lovelock's plan to pump ocean water to stop climate change
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
But what shade?
You have to admire any outfit that plugs its green cred on the back of a PR piece highlighting the perils of greenwashing.
But I have taken the bait, if mainly because I actually missed the point, or rather misread the intro, which was in fact about landscaping, and actually seemed/s to rather confusingly advocate/s greenwashing as a good thing.
According to the release, 'Wikipedia identifies Greenwash as the actions of an organisation which advertises positive environmental practices while acting in the opposite way.' Actually I wouldn't have gone quite that far, as most I think do not actively redirect, though one could argue that vast funds on hot air and no substance could be deemed that way by denying better options..
And I also learned that 'This currently fashionable form of ‘environmental window dressing’ has become so popular that CorpWatch now even gives out bimonthly Greenwash awards to companies that put more money, time and energy into slick PR campaigns aimed at promoting their eco-friendly images, than they do to actually protecting the environment'. Must sign up if I can find the URL... it looks a hoot.
They go on to share Greenpeace mocking on its website that Greenwash has become so sophisticated that its upgrade has just been launched: “Climatewash - Greenwash 2.0. Simple, cheap and no real change needed - great for big business!” Tinkers.
So I'm probably being dense in not quite getting what they're on about, when I get there, for detail on their product/service that has much to do with the joys of greenwashing. Especially when, after all the fun stuff above I got rather lost in the press release's rather boring facts and figures on the actual service.
Anyway, as they did give me some new stuff, I'll share that they are called Marshalls and have a carbon calculator that has been specially developed using product life cycle information that has been independently verified, which apparently means that all of the CO2 emitted during production of raw materials, manufacture and transportation of the product has been carefully measured and minimised.
At the very least I learned some stuff I didn't know before.
But I have taken the bait, if mainly because I actually missed the point, or rather misread the intro, which was in fact about landscaping, and actually seemed/s to rather confusingly advocate/s greenwashing as a good thing.
According to the release, 'Wikipedia identifies Greenwash as the actions of an organisation which advertises positive environmental practices while acting in the opposite way.' Actually I wouldn't have gone quite that far, as most I think do not actively redirect, though one could argue that vast funds on hot air and no substance could be deemed that way by denying better options..
And I also learned that 'This currently fashionable form of ‘environmental window dressing’ has become so popular that CorpWatch now even gives out bimonthly Greenwash awards to companies that put more money, time and energy into slick PR campaigns aimed at promoting their eco-friendly images, than they do to actually protecting the environment'. Must sign up if I can find the URL... it looks a hoot.
They go on to share Greenpeace mocking on its website that Greenwash has become so sophisticated that its upgrade has just been launched: “Climatewash - Greenwash 2.0. Simple, cheap and no real change needed - great for big business!” Tinkers.
So I'm probably being dense in not quite getting what they're on about, when I get there, for detail on their product/service that has much to do with the joys of greenwashing. Especially when, after all the fun stuff above I got rather lost in the press release's rather boring facts and figures on the actual service.
Anyway, as they did give me some new stuff, I'll share that they are called Marshalls and have a carbon calculator that has been specially developed using product life cycle information that has been independently verified, which apparently means that all of the CO2 emitted during production of raw materials, manufacture and transportation of the product has been carefully measured and minimised.
At the very least I learned some stuff I didn't know before.
Can we fix it? Yes, we should!
Hard to see a downside to this: BOB THE BUILDER LAUNCHES ‘PROJECT RENOVATE’*
The iconic kids' character has been teamed up with thinkinsulation.com and Travis Perkins, to launch Project Renovate, a National Eco-Award Programme offering nurseries and pre-schools in the UK a chance renovate their building.
Twelve renovations worth up to £5,000 (with t&cs, so check first) are on offer. And each winner will receive a visit from Bob himself!
There's a Resource Pack with entry guidelines and information for practitioners and children about the programme. It includes activities linked to the early year’s foundation stage curriculum to help young children understand some of the key environmental concepts such as how to save water, electricity and heat. Fun activity sheets will also be available, including Bob rhymes, photographs and a renovation check list and poster to show the nursery’s support and involvement in Bob’s Award Programme.
Apparently Bob's motto is ‘Reduce, Reuse and Recycle!’, but I seem to recall 'Can we fix it? Yes we can!' being high on the rallying cry list around the site, and as repair is very much a plank of the Junkk.com ethos along with reuse, we're up for that too.
As prizes go, I'm equally impressed that insulation features in this regard, having banged on so long about how this aspect seems a real priority to get across, and into our nation's lofts and cavity walls.
Eligible nurseries are required to submit their entries by 31st January 2008.
*Site goes live w/c Oct 8.
The iconic kids' character has been teamed up with thinkinsulation.com and Travis Perkins, to launch Project Renovate, a National Eco-Award Programme offering nurseries and pre-schools in the UK a chance renovate their building.
Twelve renovations worth up to £5,000 (with t&cs, so check first) are on offer. And each winner will receive a visit from Bob himself!
There's a Resource Pack with entry guidelines and information for practitioners and children about the programme. It includes activities linked to the early year’s foundation stage curriculum to help young children understand some of the key environmental concepts such as how to save water, electricity and heat. Fun activity sheets will also be available, including Bob rhymes, photographs and a renovation check list and poster to show the nursery’s support and involvement in Bob’s Award Programme.
Apparently Bob's motto is ‘Reduce, Reuse and Recycle!’, but I seem to recall 'Can we fix it? Yes we can!' being high on the rallying cry list around the site, and as repair is very much a plank of the Junkk.com ethos along with reuse, we're up for that too.
As prizes go, I'm equally impressed that insulation features in this regard, having banged on so long about how this aspect seems a real priority to get across, and into our nation's lofts and cavity walls.
Eligible nurseries are required to submit their entries by 31st January 2008.
*Site goes live w/c Oct 8.
Money in the air
Well, hydrogen powered varieties anyway!
This burns to water gas has cropped up a few times of late, and mostly the discussion has been where it comes from first. And mighty impressive have been the brains applied.
So, in case you have a spare few moments and a Zeppelin's worth of inspiration, this looks worth having a go at: hydrogencontest
This burns to water gas has cropped up a few times of late, and mostly the discussion has been where it comes from first. And mighty impressive have been the brains applied.
So, in case you have a spare few moments and a Zeppelin's worth of inspiration, this looks worth having a go at: hydrogencontest
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)