Interesting how far and how deep the fallout from the CH4 censure ruling released, as referred to in previous recent posts.
As readers will know, I subscribe to various forums (that, depending on how anal the owners and readers/users are, can be demmed/meant as 'lists').
They can be very valuable, and often inspir spirited debate.
They can also be mean-spirited, as I have again found to my cost (not for the first time... nor will it be the last).
To this:
Re: Ofcom ruling - The Great Global Warming Swindle
Actually both sides claim victory. Channel4 seem to have been let off
on a rather bizarre technicality
"Ofcom's Broadcasting Code requires Channel 4 to show "due
impartiality" on "matters of major political and industrial
controversy and major matters relating to current public policy".
Human hands are driving climate change, Ofcom acknowledges
The last segment of the programme, dealing with the politics of
climate change, broke this obligation, Ofcom judged, and did not
reflect a range of views, as required under the code.
But the main portion of the film, on climate science, did not breach
these rules.
Ofcom's logic is that "the link between human activity and global
warming... became settled before March 2007".
This being so, it says, climate science was not "controversial" at
the time of broadcast, so Channel 4 did not break regulations by
broadcasting something that challenged the link.
"That's a very big inconsistency," said Sir John Houghton. "They said
it's completely settled, so why worry - so they can just broadcast
any old rubbish." "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7517509.stm
I replied thus:
'...so they can just broadcast any old rubbish."
Indeed. But I despair of any rational, objective and especially accurate reporting from just about anyone these days, be it from perverse agenda, a desire for ratings or just plain rubbish standards.
I was watching BBC News this morning about some Green Motor show and although it was fluff as a result of claims made had to write in twice:
H2...oh? - I am a big fan of the potential of hydrogen as an automotive fuel, and fully accept that it is mainly water that comes out the exhaust pipe (which is good at point of release) but is it true to say a car using it is 'zero emission'? I think it may have some consequence as the car and fuel still needs to be made.
Declan: 'Green cars... ...Without the environmental cost' Without... or reduced? They are different.
There are too many people deciding for the public who are, IMHO, not that well placed to lay claim to the role, often with those above them with some very odd notions on what 'is best'. Often with a target of some rather dubious green profit forecast as their guide than what is best for my kids.
It is a sad state affairs when I now take much from the state broadcaster, especially when broadcasting matters of state, with at best a pinch of salt on such critical issues as climate, worthy reductions & mitigations, etc. And across all other major media, especially print, the lines are pretty clearly drawn... with sniping mainly from very extreme corners that serve those in the middle ground poorly served for worthwhile subjective argument let alone objective fact. And the tabloids really only care if they can scream about either a disaster, jobsworth-abuse or score a PR-partnership for a week 'til a minor royal has a blonde moment.
Hence I tend to navigate around many sources to try and get to a middle ground, but boy does it do your head in trying.
To which I had this, shared with all:
Perhaps surprisingly, reporting on technical stuff is not as easy as it looks since it involves maintaining your contact base (ie not completely enraging them so they don’t take your calls) while interpreting complex scientific matters while not attempting to engage a reader who’d prefer to be reading the football while keeping your editor and (sometimes sales people) happy. All this is done to deadline with minimal resources.
Give it a whirl and let me know how you get on.
Fair dos. But I did sense a ceratin critique not such much to my argument as to my abilities, so I replied:
Well if I did at the moment under the guise of being an objective seeker of truth I'd say it might well be a case of two wrongs making an even bigger mess.
Which is why I tend to steer clear of absolutes and stating things as fact when they might not be. These things can come back to pull rugs.
But you know, given sufficient resources, staff, researchers, access to expert input, and holding true to some journalistic and editorial integrity, plus a bit of honesty and humility, I might be tempted to give it a go one day.
And I'd like to think that I'd lay out the facts and issues as I know them, to the best of my ability, and get them proofed and checked at every stage. And invite the reader to join me on a journey of mutual discovery where all opinion, if well thought through and shared in a civilised manner, is welcome. So even hard and fast rules can evolve.
Until then, I guess I'll have to live with what the current, and unlikely to improve circumstances (as they have spiralled downhill) you describe throws up.
Seems hardly satisfactory. Maybe you are right. Best not to express an opinion. Doesn't do much good. I made my suggestions to the BBC at about 7am. They were still running with what I believed to be inaccurate/misguided information by the end of the show.
Was I incorrect?
All seems a bit like brooking no critique of the Captain of the Exxon Valdez by suggesting to a miffed Alaskan that he tries steering a supertanker whilst merry.
And as I had been invited (challenged), I then added this:
Ah, a shared love of writing.
Mine is, perhaps, for now, less professional (I don't get paid - and I was going to be flip about what such as Clarkson or Liddle do find in his wallet, but I don't smoke and like my hair short. And while I often respect their commitments to good journalistic standards in going deep and not being afraid to feast on the odd sacred cow, I despair that writers of such calibre have sold out to ratings (and their rewards) by such shock-jock, rabble-rousing idiocies as running over cyclists being a sensible comment to pass) in my latest chosen area of interest, but it doesn't stop me. So we have that in common as well.
Give it a whirl and let me know how you get on.
Actually, I have... er.. do on occasion, when the mood takes.
Let me see, bearing my soul... and exposed underbelly, how about this...
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/11/junkk-category-plastic-bags.html
Didn't claim it was definitive, but gave it my best shot.
How'd I do? My scorecard (heavily biased mind)
reporting on technical stuff is not as easy - agreed
as it looks since it involves maintaining your contact base (ie not completely enraging them so they don’t take your calls) - must have been lucky with mine so far
while interpreting complex scientific matters while not attempting to engage a reader who’d prefer to be reading the football - OK, I'll concede my audience might be more empathetic
while keeping your editor - he's a nice guy, honest:) And for now likes things that way.
and (sometimes sales people) happy - ah, well, a man can dream of a day when the sales director bursts in and says 'So what if we have 2M guys who trust what you write... I've negotiated a spread sponsored by Porsche, so you must say the Cayenne Turbo is the best in its class for emissions!!! And I then say... no (unless it is).'
All this is done to deadline with minimal resources - er...tick... and, tick.
I'm guessing not all are written as the reader might hope or imagine. But I'm sure you know better than I.
OK, I was being... at tad... sarky, and while it's no excuse 'he did start it'.
But now I have this, currently off forum, direct:
Is that post really appropriate on a list of over 700 members?
Does it inform?
Who benefitted from you sending that to us all, rather than off-list to Michael?
Please, have some courtesy.
To which I am sorely tempted to reply with this:
Is that post really appropriate on a list of over 700 members?
I thought so. You think not. If not appropriate to some I guess it is worth asking. I wonder what the other 698 think. Are you an owner... or moderator*?
If it breached any rules I am sorry and would not repeat it, if allowed to stay. If so, what might they be?
Does it inform?
If you refer to my last, it most certainly did, especially anyone interested in plastic bags.
And, perhaps, those keen to see me try and answer the question... challenge posted to me as an individual, admittedly as a result of my being concerned in general terms at the levels of journalism to which the public is exposed. Interestingly I did not disagree with anyone here, but a view, and it has led to this, so quickly.
Who benefitted from you sending that to us all, rather than off-list to Michael?
I trust you demanded the same of him first. But then this did arise as a result of interesting interpretations of two wrongs...
Please, have some courtesy.
I fear I fail to see the lack of courtesy, especially when much more blatant examples of its lack are prevalent on this 'list' that I simply delete if they do not appeal.
But then consistency does not seem to be a strong suit on occasion.
* If not, I suggest you call for me to be censured.
Now, should I?
I do confess, the level of heat directed, personally, at those who do not toe the line, especially party line group thinks on so-called sustainable blogs, is a real worry.
Addendum: I have now had this, off forum, from the initial challenger:
A blog – even a fine, upstanding and popular one such as yours – is a completely different thing from journalism. I’m not saying better or worse, just different and not comparable.
To which I have replied, in the same manner. I hope addressing some possible inherent inconsistencies in tone and fact in a courteous manner:
Thanks for the compliment, if sincere. As to your following statement it is an interesting distinction, and one I'd like to have debated, but no longer in such circumstances.
I have also been written to 'off list' by someone who suggests, amongst some other views I really cannot agree with or subscribe to, that I was discourteous, though whether he meant to the list or just you I am not sure.
If the former I am sure he has written to you too (by virtue of your writing direct now I suspect yes - I am having some trouble assessing what is and is not deemed acceptable for mass broadcast and what is not. It cannot be matters of extensive philosophical musings vs. factual shares if recent post are anything to go by. So I'll for now go with 'inconsistent', erring on don't cross the group ethos... whatever that is. I believe in sustainability but often don't with the way it is advocated, practiced or preached ). However if only the latter it seems I may yet need to respond to those I may have offended.
I did not set out to be and hence do not think I was discourteous, but it is possible by my responding to a challenge in the spirit of healthy debate it may have come across that way, in which case I apologise.
But I also fear that, while this list still has its uses as a source of information and even worthy opinion, if I get targeted off list by those who do not like certain views or my right to express them, then its use is now seriously curtailed.
Addendum - Separate to my little local difficulty, a few other posters have engaged in what can most charitably be called philosophical discussions and/or disagreements. As it was limited to a small group I quickly learned to scan and delete and move on.
Now the group is tearing itself apart. There are the pompous literalists calling for all sorts of 'measures', my nemesis suggesting the chosen ones move to another group he is part of 'where only the right sort of poster and post is allowed', and a few wondering what the heck all the fuss is about. It is these latter I feel the most sorry for, and wonder to what extent they represent a noisy few from a silent majority who will simply give up as a result of the smugs and bullies. Especially those who feel that having an alternative opinion is not to be tolerated.
A sad, small, metaphor for where we are still?
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Auntie giveth, and Auntie taketh away
No one could excuse the BBC of being anything less than an enthusiastic proponent of matters green.
However, in its zeal I do wish it reporters could attempt to get their heads around certain realities so things can be put in proper context.
Today business reporter Declan Curry is at a Motor Show, which has a green section. So far, so interesting.
However, I have had to write in now twice:
H2...oh? - I am a big fan of the potential of hydrogen as an automotive fuel, and fully accept that it is mainly water that comes out the exhaust pipe (which is good at point of release) but is it true to say a car using it is 'zero emission'? I think it may have some consequence as the car and fuel still needs to be made.
Declan: 'Green cars... ...Without the environmental cost' Without... or reduced? They are different.
Telegraph - British International Motor Show: Green gloss masks red shift for car industry
I think I am on a loser here. They are, pssobly, 'better', but I guess the definition is now too firmly entrenched to save us from a marekting onslaught that ignores the actual enviROI:
21/07/2008: “2p A Mile” Car Ready To Roll Off Production Line
A zero-emission electric car that does the equivalent of 250 miles to the gallon is set for a summer launch.
EU Referedum - NEW - Green illiteracy
However, in its zeal I do wish it reporters could attempt to get their heads around certain realities so things can be put in proper context.
Today business reporter Declan Curry is at a Motor Show, which has a green section. So far, so interesting.
However, I have had to write in now twice:
H2...oh? - I am a big fan of the potential of hydrogen as an automotive fuel, and fully accept that it is mainly water that comes out the exhaust pipe (which is good at point of release) but is it true to say a car using it is 'zero emission'? I think it may have some consequence as the car and fuel still needs to be made.
Declan: 'Green cars... ...Without the environmental cost' Without... or reduced? They are different.
Telegraph - British International Motor Show: Green gloss masks red shift for car industry
I think I am on a loser here. They are, pssobly, 'better', but I guess the definition is now too firmly entrenched to save us from a marekting onslaught that ignores the actual enviROI:
21/07/2008: “2p A Mile” Car Ready To Roll Off Production Line
A zero-emission electric car that does the equivalent of 250 miles to the gallon is set for a summer launch.
EU Referedum - NEW - Green illiteracy
Monday, July 21, 2008
Ah, the sweet smell of a comms budget
Government kids website pays £6 for every visitor
No, it's not about the environment. But it's in this blog because it so easily could be.
As a matter of interest, is their a public/FoI-type thingie to find out what has been blown on creating'/gets blown on running Govt./quango sites and how this all equates to actual usage?
No, it's not about the environment. But it's in this blog because it so easily could be.
As a matter of interest, is their a public/FoI-type thingie to find out what has been blown on creating'/gets blown on running Govt./quango sites and how this all equates to actual usage?
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Who'd have thunk?
Report rigged. Enquiry hijacked... shock.
BAA invented ‘green’ jumbo to help win Heathrow case
Now, how confident to we feel on Nuclear, Wind farms, GM...?
BAA invented ‘green’ jumbo to help win Heathrow case
Now, how confident to we feel on Nuclear, Wind farms, GM...?
Saturday, July 19, 2008
It's a view, certainly
Over on my other blog, there is reference to a BBC Editor who is 'helping' the government on some political options.
There is a small storm however, based on the fact that he essentially outlines an either/or for them, and by association the reader, that sort of throws the imposition or sparing of pain ultimately back on the public. Basically tax more or provide fewer services.
What he has been caught doing, and held to account for, is ignoring another option which, while equally unpalatable, should at least be in the mix. And that is trim the fat within the machine of government itself first. No real surprise of course, bearing in mind the unique way the BBC is funded, and the way this government has conducted itself over the last decade. How many more packaged and pensioned civ. servs and quango-getters on the public payroll now...1 million?
Which is what struck me reading this, for obvious reasons that will become clear, if horrible to be thinking about:
The natural consequence of human greed
There is no excuse not to do what one can, but it certainly makes me even more determined not to get on the sanctimonious route of many of the greenerati who may do all sorts of stuff, and doubtless rush to print to tell us they are, and we should, but for whom the actual back to basics suggested in this piece would not be part of the programme so long as the economy, nice job and/or trust fund delivers.
There is a small storm however, based on the fact that he essentially outlines an either/or for them, and by association the reader, that sort of throws the imposition or sparing of pain ultimately back on the public. Basically tax more or provide fewer services.
What he has been caught doing, and held to account for, is ignoring another option which, while equally unpalatable, should at least be in the mix. And that is trim the fat within the machine of government itself first. No real surprise of course, bearing in mind the unique way the BBC is funded, and the way this government has conducted itself over the last decade. How many more packaged and pensioned civ. servs and quango-getters on the public payroll now...1 million?
Which is what struck me reading this, for obvious reasons that will become clear, if horrible to be thinking about:
The natural consequence of human greed
There is no excuse not to do what one can, but it certainly makes me even more determined not to get on the sanctimonious route of many of the greenerati who may do all sorts of stuff, and doubtless rush to print to tell us they are, and we should, but for whom the actual back to basics suggested in this piece would not be part of the programme so long as the economy, nice job and/or trust fund delivers.
Look, flying pigs!
Flying empty aeroplanes to keep landing slots should never happen
I have been here before. I wonder why I am back again.
There is what is, and there is what should be. Which is why 'should' is one of my least favourite words, especially when used in headlines.
I have been here before. I wonder why I am back again.
There is what is, and there is what should be. Which is why 'should' is one of my least favourite words, especially when used in headlines.
Don't know what to make of this
I tend to steer clear of Climate Changey stuff as it inevitably ends up so far at two extremes as to be essentially useless as information and simply overall unpleasant to be amongst.
However, I do feel this worth posting, as I was alerted to it by a rather coy reference on BBC Breakfast News, which also seemed to be having trouble with the 'censure' bit being followed by the 'did not mislead' bit.
Channel 4 to be censured over climate film
As soon as I finish this sentence I might hop over to the Ch4 site to see how they spin it. What's the betting there might be a different order of emphasis?
... well there's a surprise. Nothing. At least, that I could find. And what a woeful site! Some of the news items are months old!
Thing is, I really don't know what to make of it all. At best there seems to be some value in news creators being told not to tell porkies, and also for those who would deny the deniers to get to grips with the fact that there are many who are not yet convinced of various 'facts' and consequent solutions, and that sulking is not going to cut it in rebuttal. I'd suggest tackling the arguments rather than the persons making them, and lock down the science rather blowing it out of proportion such that subsequent errors don't prove a gift to those seeking to spin another way.
As for the BBC, I'd also suggest getting a little more balance in, and a little less theatre in trying to help the public assess it. Lord Monckton and Roger Harrabin, while undoubtedly well-informed by now (so many miles flown in the pursuit of knowledge), are hardly well placed to reassure me that what I am getting has been sifted for even the most basic factual rigour.
Addendum - Global warming and the arks of the 41st century - seems about the right place for it
Addendum 2 - OFCOM ruling - that only a person with too much time, or no life, could love.
BBC - Climate documentary 'broke rules' (on e way of looking at it)
The Register - Climate Swindle film: bruised egos, but no offence (another way)
The Times - Channel 4 censured for programme that said climate change was a fraud (and another, reflecting the Guardian article referred to above. Ain't news reporting grand these days?)
Ch4 - All I could find: CHANNEL 4 APOLOGY OVER CLIMATE CHANGE DOCUMENTARY
The broadcasting regulator, Ofcom, has made serious criticisms of a Channel 4 documentary which challenged the consensual theory within the scientific community that human activity is the prime cause of global warming and climate change.
The regulator has found The Great Global Warming Swindle, which was aired last year, failed to meet obligations to be impartial and to represent a range of views, and was ‘unjust and unfair’ in the way it treated and represented individuals. But, concludes Ofcom, the programme did not mislead audiences ‘so as to cause harm’.
Read our five-minute guide to climate change
Indy - C4's climate change documentary 'was unfair but not misleading'
Indy - Michael McCarthy: Ofcom's judgement failed to address the key question... was this programme accurate?
Gaurdian - Why does Channel 4 seem to be waging a war against the greens? -
Gaurdian - Watchdog's verdict on Channel 4 climate film angers scientists -
Gaurdian - The public has been swindled - Might be time to pop over to another chann... paper route. This is getting... predictabel... partisan... etc. Sure it will be 'over there', too.
Telegraph - Channel 4 censured for misrepresenting scientists on climate change
Telegraph - Climate change fanatics censor inconvenient truths - a minority view perhaps - I have to say that the whole thing is rather embodied to me by one 'side' using the term 'deniers' and the other 'fanatics', with no sesne of anything other than these entrenched views existing... or being allowed to. Me, I'm a climate* dunno'er, but best to err on caution. But none of this lot get my voet to speak for me.
The Times, so far, seems to have missed it.
BBC - Newsnight - A Great Channel 4 Swindle? - always good for a laugh
Ch4 - It's not we who make the public sceptical on climate change - If I were to take anything as a member of the media from this sorry affair, it is:
1)Don't take sides
2)Don't pander to agendas
3)Don't chase ratings
4)Don't make things up
5)If you get it wrong, apologise, put it right... and don't do it again.
Which does of course applies to all sides in this 'argument'. I for one am fed sick of the extremes and, sadly, my first thought is to ignore the whole sorry lot.
* as in Probably Man-Worsened
Gaurdian - The great lunar rockism con - What strikes me most is how many replies have been deleted.
Telegraph - NEW - Channel 4 defends itself against green censorship
However, I do feel this worth posting, as I was alerted to it by a rather coy reference on BBC Breakfast News, which also seemed to be having trouble with the 'censure' bit being followed by the 'did not mislead' bit.
Channel 4 to be censured over climate film
As soon as I finish this sentence I might hop over to the Ch4 site to see how they spin it. What's the betting there might be a different order of emphasis?
... well there's a surprise. Nothing. At least, that I could find. And what a woeful site! Some of the news items are months old!
Thing is, I really don't know what to make of it all. At best there seems to be some value in news creators being told not to tell porkies, and also for those who would deny the deniers to get to grips with the fact that there are many who are not yet convinced of various 'facts' and consequent solutions, and that sulking is not going to cut it in rebuttal. I'd suggest tackling the arguments rather than the persons making them, and lock down the science rather blowing it out of proportion such that subsequent errors don't prove a gift to those seeking to spin another way.
As for the BBC, I'd also suggest getting a little more balance in, and a little less theatre in trying to help the public assess it. Lord Monckton and Roger Harrabin, while undoubtedly well-informed by now (so many miles flown in the pursuit of knowledge), are hardly well placed to reassure me that what I am getting has been sifted for even the most basic factual rigour.
Addendum - Global warming and the arks of the 41st century - seems about the right place for it
Addendum 2 - OFCOM ruling - that only a person with too much time, or no life, could love.
BBC - Climate documentary 'broke rules' (on e way of looking at it)
The Register - Climate Swindle film: bruised egos, but no offence (another way)
The Times - Channel 4 censured for programme that said climate change was a fraud (and another, reflecting the Guardian article referred to above. Ain't news reporting grand these days?)
Ch4 - All I could find: CHANNEL 4 APOLOGY OVER CLIMATE CHANGE DOCUMENTARY
The broadcasting regulator, Ofcom, has made serious criticisms of a Channel 4 documentary which challenged the consensual theory within the scientific community that human activity is the prime cause of global warming and climate change.
The regulator has found The Great Global Warming Swindle, which was aired last year, failed to meet obligations to be impartial and to represent a range of views, and was ‘unjust and unfair’ in the way it treated and represented individuals. But, concludes Ofcom, the programme did not mislead audiences ‘so as to cause harm’.
Read our five-minute guide to climate change
Indy - C4's climate change documentary 'was unfair but not misleading'
Indy - Michael McCarthy: Ofcom's judgement failed to address the key question... was this programme accurate?
Gaurdian - Why does Channel 4 seem to be waging a war against the greens? -
Gaurdian - Watchdog's verdict on Channel 4 climate film angers scientists -
Gaurdian - The public has been swindled - Might be time to pop over to another chann... paper route. This is getting... predictabel... partisan... etc. Sure it will be 'over there', too.
Telegraph - Channel 4 censured for misrepresenting scientists on climate change
Telegraph - Climate change fanatics censor inconvenient truths - a minority view perhaps - I have to say that the whole thing is rather embodied to me by one 'side' using the term 'deniers' and the other 'fanatics', with no sesne of anything other than these entrenched views existing... or being allowed to. Me, I'm a climate* dunno'er, but best to err on caution. But none of this lot get my voet to speak for me.
The Times, so far, seems to have missed it.
BBC - Newsnight - A Great Channel 4 Swindle? - always good for a laugh
Ch4 - It's not we who make the public sceptical on climate change - If I were to take anything as a member of the media from this sorry affair, it is:
1)Don't take sides
2)Don't pander to agendas
3)Don't chase ratings
4)Don't make things up
5)If you get it wrong, apologise, put it right... and don't do it again.
Which does of course applies to all sides in this 'argument'. I for one am fed sick of the extremes and, sadly, my first thought is to ignore the whole sorry lot.
* as in Probably Man-Worsened
Gaurdian - The great lunar rockism con - What strikes me most is how many replies have been deleted.
Telegraph - NEW - Channel 4 defends itself against green censorship
Thursday, July 17, 2008
PETITION - ESTABLISHING ESTABLISHMENT STANDS
These days it seems a lot gets done in our names by our 'representatives' and other 'leaders'.
Fair enough. Often we are too busy, or lazy, to get involved in the minutiae of governance, which is why we trust elected, and often not quite so elected folk to get up to stuff in our name. Approving and disapproving. Asking and taking to task.
However, often there seem these days to be powerful forces at work that can skew what happens in our name away from courses that we might hope for, and even approve of. Everything from lobby groups to the rather unattractive, if to some degree understandable notion that what might be right, specially for later on (when out of office and either in comfortable index-linked retirement or 6' under) might not attract votes, as such, now.
Worse still, I am sensing some voting on key issues is not so much on the issue themselves, to to removing checks and balances that might at first glance seem innocuous, but actually are there to address more controversial topics at a later stage.
Again, by the time all this happens those who instituted/scuppered the deal might well be long gone.
It might exist already, but I propose a simple chart (with key headings - Nuclear, Planning, etc) of those in power, predominantly MPs, Ministers, MEPs, etc, but also quango heads and even business leaders, who are on record as being 'pro' or 'con' an action/piece of legalisation/etc, especially with their voting record along with a brief, comprehensible summary (this is key, so every voter can understand the issues, at least as well as they are capable of being expressed) of what the consequences of their voting might be and, if and when proven, has/is/will come to pass.
At the very least I want these fine chaps and chapesses to be confronted with the consequences of their actions and, even if they are long gone, in an archived way their descendants can appreciate their legacies (good... and bad).
Perhaps it could be called 'The Parapet Post'? And for some, maybe it become, with cause, a pillory?
ADDENDUM - Bit of fun: as there seemed to be nothing like it, I have submitted a petition:
'The Parapet Post' – a simple online, constantly updated, archived chart/record of our leaders’ voting records on topics, with possible and actual outcomes listed.
We are too busy, or lazy, to get involved in the minutiae of governance, so we trust elected, and often not quite so elected folk to act in our name. Approving/disapproving. Asking/taking to task.
However, these days powerful forces can skew away from courses that we might hope for, and even approve of. Everything from lobby groups to vote-driven self interest.
Voting on key issues can not be so much on the issues themselves, but to removing checks and balances that might at first glance seem innocuous, but actually are there to address more controversial topics at a later stage.
I request a simple online chart (with key headings - Nuclear, Planning, etc) of those in power, predominantly MPs, Ministers, MEPs, etc, but also quango heads, who are on record as being 'pro' or 'con' an action/piece of legislation/etc, especially with their voting record along with a brief, comprehensible summary (this is key, so every voter can understand the issues, at least as well as they are capable of being expressed) of what the consequences of their voting might be and, if and when proven, has/is/will come to pass.
BBC - Poll finds AMs back more powers
Guardian - NEW - How many MPs are climate change sceptics? - LED burning crosses at the ready?
Addendum - 17/07/08 - Oh, wo..e is me. And boy, was it quick:
I'm sorry to inform you that your petition has been rejected.
Your petition was classed as being in the following categories:
* Issues for which an e-petition is not the appropriate channel
Further information: Sites containing this requested
information already exist e.g. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/
If you wish to edit and resubmit your petition, please follow
the following link:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/TheParapetPost/BCfF51CgkEwAEDq1PTALogg
You have four weeks in which to do this, after which your
petition will appear in the list of rejected petitions.
Hmn. While the cited site is very good, it really doesn't do what I was asking, at least in the easy to assess, tabular, evolving manner I was suggesting.
Still, I still have Pols Porkies or the Wall of sLime to develop.
Fair enough. Often we are too busy, or lazy, to get involved in the minutiae of governance, which is why we trust elected, and often not quite so elected folk to get up to stuff in our name. Approving and disapproving. Asking and taking to task.
However, often there seem these days to be powerful forces at work that can skew what happens in our name away from courses that we might hope for, and even approve of. Everything from lobby groups to the rather unattractive, if to some degree understandable notion that what might be right, specially for later on (when out of office and either in comfortable index-linked retirement or 6' under) might not attract votes, as such, now.
Worse still, I am sensing some voting on key issues is not so much on the issue themselves, to to removing checks and balances that might at first glance seem innocuous, but actually are there to address more controversial topics at a later stage.
Again, by the time all this happens those who instituted/scuppered the deal might well be long gone.
It might exist already, but I propose a simple chart (with key headings - Nuclear, Planning, etc) of those in power, predominantly MPs, Ministers, MEPs, etc, but also quango heads and even business leaders, who are on record as being 'pro' or 'con' an action/piece of legalisation/etc, especially with their voting record along with a brief, comprehensible summary (this is key, so every voter can understand the issues, at least as well as they are capable of being expressed) of what the consequences of their voting might be and, if and when proven, has/is/will come to pass.
At the very least I want these fine chaps and chapesses to be confronted with the consequences of their actions and, even if they are long gone, in an archived way their descendants can appreciate their legacies (good... and bad).
Perhaps it could be called 'The Parapet Post'? And for some, maybe it become, with cause, a pillory?
ADDENDUM - Bit of fun: as there seemed to be nothing like it, I have submitted a petition:
'The Parapet Post' – a simple online, constantly updated, archived chart/record of our leaders’ voting records on topics, with possible and actual outcomes listed.
We are too busy, or lazy, to get involved in the minutiae of governance, so we trust elected, and often not quite so elected folk to act in our name. Approving/disapproving. Asking/taking to task.
However, these days powerful forces can skew away from courses that we might hope for, and even approve of. Everything from lobby groups to vote-driven self interest.
Voting on key issues can not be so much on the issues themselves, but to removing checks and balances that might at first glance seem innocuous, but actually are there to address more controversial topics at a later stage.
I request a simple online chart (with key headings - Nuclear, Planning, etc) of those in power, predominantly MPs, Ministers, MEPs, etc, but also quango heads, who are on record as being 'pro' or 'con' an action/piece of legislation/etc, especially with their voting record along with a brief, comprehensible summary (this is key, so every voter can understand the issues, at least as well as they are capable of being expressed) of what the consequences of their voting might be and, if and when proven, has/is/will come to pass.
BBC - Poll finds AMs back more powers
Guardian - NEW - How many MPs are climate change sceptics? - LED burning crosses at the ready?
Addendum - 17/07/08 - Oh, wo..e is me. And boy, was it quick:
I'm sorry to inform you that your petition has been rejected.
Your petition was classed as being in the following categories:
* Issues for which an e-petition is not the appropriate channel
Further information: Sites containing this requested
information already exist e.g. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/
If you wish to edit and resubmit your petition, please follow
the following link:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/TheParapetPost/BCfF51CgkEwAEDq1PTALogg
You have four weeks in which to do this, after which your
petition will appear in the list of rejected petitions.
Hmn. While the cited site is very good, it really doesn't do what I was asking, at least in the easy to assess, tabular, evolving manner I was suggesting.
Still, I still have Pols Porkies or the Wall of sLime to develop.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
And some go boom
OK, so it's nothing much to do with matters green, but I figure I bash the BBC a lot so wanted to share something good, at least via their good offices:
Elements brought to life online
periodicvideos.com
Elements brought to life online
periodicvideos.com
Now there's a surprise!
What's that, you may ask? The chancellor's pronouncement today that the forthcoming 2p/litre increase in fuel duty is going to be postponed. Full story from the Telegraph.
"Postponing the planned increase in fuel duty is consistent with the Government's commitment to support the Bank of England in maintaining low inflation."
Hmmmm! So its all about controlling inflation? You're kidding, right? Note the key word, 'postponing'. Not canceling, abandoning, withdrawing, but simply postponing; perhaps until things quieten down a little so they can re-introduce it when all our minds are on other things?
Or am I being overtly cynical again?
"Postponing the planned increase in fuel duty is consistent with the Government's commitment to support the Bank of England in maintaining low inflation."
Hmmmm! So its all about controlling inflation? You're kidding, right? Note the key word, 'postponing'. Not canceling, abandoning, withdrawing, but simply postponing; perhaps until things quieten down a little so they can re-introduce it when all our minds are on other things?
Or am I being overtly cynical again?
Mirror, mirror. Well, Guardian, Guardian.
There's a trendy Volvo TV commercial running at the 'mo.
It's not very good, but does embody well the trend of 'how one looks at things': 'Do you see art... or vandalism?' when referring to graffiti. 'Security... or nanny state?'. That kind of thing.
Which brings me to this press release, and the event to which it refers.
GREEN MEP TO SLATE E.ON ‘GREENWASH’ SPONSORSHIP AT GUARDIAN ENVIRONMENT SUMMIT
Green MEP for the South East Dr Caroline Lucas will use her speaking time at
tomorrow’s Guardian Climate Change Summit to slate energy giant E.ON's
sponsorship of the high profile event promoting responsible environmental
policy.
She commented: “While I welcome the Guardian's efforts to promote private,
public, political and campaign sector debate around climate change, and
accept that commercial backing is necessary in this instance, the decision
to allow a company like E.ON to gain a PR win by sponsoring the summit is
completely misguided.
“E.ON is currently applying for planning permission to build the first new
coal-fired power station in Britain for 30 years at Kingsnorth in Kent. The
new plant would emit more than 7 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere
each year - that's as much C02 as the world's 24 lowest emitting countries
combined - and would potentially keep doing so for 50 years.”
Earlier this month, Dr Lucas was joined by Keith Allott, head of climate
change campaigns at WWF, in writing to the Guardian to ask that E.ON’s
commercial backing be revoked.
She said: “This is not an issue of calling into doubt the Guardian’s
unquestioned reputation for unbiased reporting – I have no doubt that the
Guardian will continue to report on E.ON’s activities without fear or
favour. This is an issue of E.ON associating itself with the Guardian's
summit as a cynical move to try to repair its damaged reputation.
"It's understandable that it should try. What is not understandable is that
the Guardian should connive in its attempt.”
.
E.ON is the subject of a massive campaign involving a host of environmental
organisations and activist groups. The Environmental Audit Committee, Royal
Society and the Investors Group on Climate Change have also been highly
critical of the UK's preference for coal, as symbolised by Kingsnorth.
Dr Lucas will take part in an organised protest against E.ON’s involvement
in the Guardian Climate Change Summit on the morning of the event. She will
join members of the activist group Greenwash Guerillas outside London’s
Business Design Centre to highlight the company’s crimes against the
climate.
The longstanding Green campaigner will also speak on the need to forge ahead
with environmental policy in the current economic climate, as well as
outlining the urgent need to invest in a future of fossil-fuel-free
renewable energy. She will say:
“We are facing a triple crisis – the credit crunch, the climate crisis, and
the crisis of soaring oil prices, underpinned by encroaching peak oil. Some
say that we cannot afford environmental measures. But it is precisely at a
time of economic difficulty that strong measures to reduce our crippling
dependence on fossil fuels are needed most.
“What we need is a Green New Deal: a massive investment in energy
efficiency, renewable energy and wider environmental transformation in the
UK, could lead to the creation of thousands of new green collar jobs,
addressing all three aspects of the crisis at the same time.”
Those with long memories will recall I once attended this conference, having railed in this blog about the exclusivity created by the cost of attending. And I was 'rescued' to become part of the machine by the kind support of a Tesco Director who was speaking, and invited me as his guest.
He actually did pretty well, but the main sponsor, Shell, copped it as is e.on this time, as I recall. And I wonder if Boris will be there as was Ken before?
Thing is, to what extent should, or can you critique, when the needs of your job (money, publicity, etc) pretty much suck you in to being part of the very thing you are criticising, or taking others to task for being part of.
I think it is cute indeed that e.on are the main sponsors, and that The Guardian see no problem taking their money to confer a green hue upon them with all the attendant 'it's helping the climate' hoopla, but then Ms. Lucas is there too. Even if she is using it as a means to bash her hosts from within. Interesting to post the strategy in advance.
It's not very good, but does embody well the trend of 'how one looks at things': 'Do you see art... or vandalism?' when referring to graffiti. 'Security... or nanny state?'. That kind of thing.
Which brings me to this press release, and the event to which it refers.
GREEN MEP TO SLATE E.ON ‘GREENWASH’ SPONSORSHIP AT GUARDIAN ENVIRONMENT SUMMIT
Green MEP for the South East Dr Caroline Lucas will use her speaking time at
tomorrow’s Guardian Climate Change Summit to slate energy giant E.ON's
sponsorship of the high profile event promoting responsible environmental
policy.
She commented: “While I welcome the Guardian's efforts to promote private,
public, political and campaign sector debate around climate change, and
accept that commercial backing is necessary in this instance, the decision
to allow a company like E.ON to gain a PR win by sponsoring the summit is
completely misguided.
“E.ON is currently applying for planning permission to build the first new
coal-fired power station in Britain for 30 years at Kingsnorth in Kent. The
new plant would emit more than 7 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere
each year - that's as much C02 as the world's 24 lowest emitting countries
combined - and would potentially keep doing so for 50 years.”
Earlier this month, Dr Lucas was joined by Keith Allott, head of climate
change campaigns at WWF, in writing to the Guardian to ask that E.ON’s
commercial backing be revoked.
She said: “This is not an issue of calling into doubt the Guardian’s
unquestioned reputation for unbiased reporting – I have no doubt that the
Guardian will continue to report on E.ON’s activities without fear or
favour. This is an issue of E.ON associating itself with the Guardian's
summit as a cynical move to try to repair its damaged reputation.
"It's understandable that it should try. What is not understandable is that
the Guardian should connive in its attempt.”
.
E.ON is the subject of a massive campaign involving a host of environmental
organisations and activist groups. The Environmental Audit Committee, Royal
Society and the Investors Group on Climate Change have also been highly
critical of the UK's preference for coal, as symbolised by Kingsnorth.
Dr Lucas will take part in an organised protest against E.ON’s involvement
in the Guardian Climate Change Summit on the morning of the event. She will
join members of the activist group Greenwash Guerillas outside London’s
Business Design Centre to highlight the company’s crimes against the
climate.
The longstanding Green campaigner will also speak on the need to forge ahead
with environmental policy in the current economic climate, as well as
outlining the urgent need to invest in a future of fossil-fuel-free
renewable energy. She will say:
“We are facing a triple crisis – the credit crunch, the climate crisis, and
the crisis of soaring oil prices, underpinned by encroaching peak oil. Some
say that we cannot afford environmental measures. But it is precisely at a
time of economic difficulty that strong measures to reduce our crippling
dependence on fossil fuels are needed most.
“What we need is a Green New Deal: a massive investment in energy
efficiency, renewable energy and wider environmental transformation in the
UK, could lead to the creation of thousands of new green collar jobs,
addressing all three aspects of the crisis at the same time.”
Those with long memories will recall I once attended this conference, having railed in this blog about the exclusivity created by the cost of attending. And I was 'rescued' to become part of the machine by the kind support of a Tesco Director who was speaking, and invited me as his guest.
He actually did pretty well, but the main sponsor, Shell, copped it as is e.on this time, as I recall. And I wonder if Boris will be there as was Ken before?
Thing is, to what extent should, or can you critique, when the needs of your job (money, publicity, etc) pretty much suck you in to being part of the very thing you are criticising, or taking others to task for being part of.
I think it is cute indeed that e.on are the main sponsors, and that The Guardian see no problem taking their money to confer a green hue upon them with all the attendant 'it's helping the climate' hoopla, but then Ms. Lucas is there too. Even if she is using it as a means to bash her hosts from within. Interesting to post the strategy in advance.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
After you over the parapet, Capt. Blackadder.
I'm ducking this one. It is in the Guardian, so if you wade in, good luck; a few replies kinda prove the premise of the main post:)
Greens are the enemies of liberty
Sorry to see a few sources I use in there. But that's the beauty of freedom of speech. They can say it. But what seems less optimal is there are some still seem to feel others cannot.
Greens are the enemies of liberty
Sorry to see a few sources I use in there. But that's the beauty of freedom of speech. They can say it. But what seems less optimal is there are some still seem to feel others cannot.
Been here before. Not by car any more, though.
The low-carbon road out of poverty
The sooner some figure that many live outside of well-served urban centres the better. And many of those don't work near where they have to work or when such systems as do operate.
My Mum's carer is being hit hard trying to get around 10+ clients in a day round the county, and doesn't get her miles covered by taxpayer (but those already ill-positioned to help her with the rate hike will... or the tax-payer) as do our political or LA or quango classes, and using a bus or hitching a ride from a passing lifshare is not quite going to meet the flexibility or shift criteria.
So whacking her for her car choice a decade ago, plus her total lack of choice in operational cost ain't going to cut it alone.
Sorry if that doesn't gel with the bike (or taxi if it's raining) brigade in Islington or Prius types being chauffered from Westminster, but a bit more joined up national thinking might be needed to address the problems being faced without just looking like acting whilst actually crippling those trying to keep up with one knee jerk after the next.
In fact, this whole thing is shaping up as a pretty elitist, city-centric, nice-if-you-can-afford it number for the establishment brigade to wring their hands over whilst crushing those they purport to represent and/or have sympathy for, whilst just doing what they can afford to do on the backs of those who cannot.
The sooner some figure that many live outside of well-served urban centres the better. And many of those don't work near where they have to work or when such systems as do operate.
My Mum's carer is being hit hard trying to get around 10+ clients in a day round the county, and doesn't get her miles covered by taxpayer (but those already ill-positioned to help her with the rate hike will... or the tax-payer) as do our political or LA or quango classes, and using a bus or hitching a ride from a passing lifshare is not quite going to meet the flexibility or shift criteria.
So whacking her for her car choice a decade ago, plus her total lack of choice in operational cost ain't going to cut it alone.
Sorry if that doesn't gel with the bike (or taxi if it's raining) brigade in Islington or Prius types being chauffered from Westminster, but a bit more joined up national thinking might be needed to address the problems being faced without just looking like acting whilst actually crippling those trying to keep up with one knee jerk after the next.
In fact, this whole thing is shaping up as a pretty elitist, city-centric, nice-if-you-can-afford it number for the establishment brigade to wring their hands over whilst crushing those they purport to represent and/or have sympathy for, whilst just doing what they can afford to do on the backs of those who cannot.
Nature's Bounty
Just watching the news about the Chinese clear up of the sailing venue.
10,000 troops cleared vast swathes of green algae clogging the shoreline and, it appears, it all has ended up in landfill.
Meanwhile, this weekend I attacked our little 1/2 acre of garden, which frankly has ended up as a jungle thanks to the combo of sun and rain. Amazing little green factories using solar energy (even through clouds) to make carbon-based materials.
And I will be trotting off with a large trolley full to the tip next weekend.
I merely ask, but I don't know, but might there not be some value in looking at efficient ways of gathering this material and getting it to places where it can be used to generate heat and resources? Maybe it does already, but if not it seems a pity that essentially my garden, if used only for compost, is mainly emitting co2 with little to show.
10,000 troops cleared vast swathes of green algae clogging the shoreline and, it appears, it all has ended up in landfill.
Meanwhile, this weekend I attacked our little 1/2 acre of garden, which frankly has ended up as a jungle thanks to the combo of sun and rain. Amazing little green factories using solar energy (even through clouds) to make carbon-based materials.
And I will be trotting off with a large trolley full to the tip next weekend.
I merely ask, but I don't know, but might there not be some value in looking at efficient ways of gathering this material and getting it to places where it can be used to generate heat and resources? Maybe it does already, but if not it seems a pity that essentially my garden, if used only for compost, is mainly emitting co2 with little to show.
Monday, July 14, 2008
Papa don't preach...
Pope to preach on climate change
‘The Pope has told reporters while flying to Australia … that people need to be spurred into changing their lifestyles because of climate change.’
LOL. Subtle, guys!
‘The Pope has told reporters while flying to Australia … that people need to be spurred into changing their lifestyles because of climate change.’
LOL. Subtle, guys!
Eight new nuclear plants to be built
That's the story as told by the Telegraph over the weekend.
I can remember Ol' Golden's pronouncement on the move to use an enhanced nuclear capability as part of the overall plan to reduce the UK's carbon emissions. However, I can also remember the promise that there would be a large public consultation before any plans were agreed and before any building program might commence. Hmmmm, it all rather smacks of a 'done deal' now.
Oh well, at least the cabinet seem to have something practical to do now - "Ministers are to build eight new nuclear power stations across England"
I hope I'm not in the vicinity when the new plants get commissioned!
I can remember Ol' Golden's pronouncement on the move to use an enhanced nuclear capability as part of the overall plan to reduce the UK's carbon emissions. However, I can also remember the promise that there would be a large public consultation before any plans were agreed and before any building program might commence. Hmmmm, it all rather smacks of a 'done deal' now.
Oh well, at least the cabinet seem to have something practical to do now - "Ministers are to build eight new nuclear power stations across England"
I hope I'm not in the vicinity when the new plants get commissioned!
Sunday, July 13, 2008
You never know, it may get printed...
...it's (my online comment about my online site) carbon footprint is pretty low:
Of course, some have moved with the times and also embraced the potential of the internet as silver surfers.
On Junkk.com, a free online site, some of the best reuse ideas posted hark from those with a lifetime of experience to share.
Times - Our grandparents were the real greens - 'Brown’s ticking-off was music to my ears. For the past year I have been researching and writing a book focusing on how green the British public... Sucking Eggs: What Your Wartime Granny Could Teach You About Diet, Thrift and Going Green will be published by Chatto & Windus in 2009
Dilemma time. I am thinking about writing a book, too, but the tricky part is building a reuse aspect into it, unless the fact it will be more a 'how to' will suffice.
Of course, some have moved with the times and also embraced the potential of the internet as silver surfers.
On Junkk.com, a free online site, some of the best reuse ideas posted hark from those with a lifetime of experience to share.
Times - Our grandparents were the real greens - 'Brown’s ticking-off was music to my ears. For the past year I have been researching and writing a book focusing on how green the British public... Sucking Eggs: What Your Wartime Granny Could Teach You About Diet, Thrift and Going Green will be published by Chatto & Windus in 2009
Dilemma time. I am thinking about writing a book, too, but the tricky part is building a reuse aspect into it, unless the fact it will be more a 'how to' will suffice.
Friday, July 11, 2008
We've been labelled!
You know how folk usually don't like being labelled?
Well, we have, and we could not be more thrilled!
Now I know I bang on about the actual use of a lot of 'green labelling' initiatives, especially to already overloaded and/confused consumers wandering down the aisles (is finding 75g of carbon in crisp pack enough to abandon the store and drive to the next town?), but how about a nifty bit of re:use ideas re:direction... on every pack? As with the recycling URL, Junkk.com is looking forward to enjoying pride of place (well, lurking) on the product ranges from Poundland.
And, until today, we knew not one thing about it, until this very nice email email arrived from a very nice chap: Neil Ballard, their Packaging & Design Manager -
"After meeting you (and being thoroughly inspired) at the Packaging Show at the NEC earlier this year, you will be pleased to know that we have now added your website address to over 600 lines of product that will be coming in to our business over the next few months (primarily Halloween and Christmas) and we will continue to do so to as many lines as possible. See attached example of how you have been integrated on to our own label packs. I hope this helps your cause and that your business/website grows exponentially!"
I actually thought it was a wind up at first, but having spoken to the man himself it looks like we have yet another, and highly significant addition to the cause... and, soon, we hope, database!
Early days, but we're looking forward to hooking up with them on all sorts of fun & games to help the consumer, the planet... and... by way of inspiring a few other businesses, our two companies' own bottom lines too!
Numbers games
I am on various forums. One threw up this link on nuclear: Warning over nuclear power sites
Before I knew it I was mouthing off...
'Could'. 'Significantly'?
I started life as a Civil Engineer. The unofficial motto was 'Civ. Eng's do for a shilling what any other idiot can do for a pound'.
I then went into advertising, mostly in Asia. The rule there was 'He who goes over approved estimate may dream fondly of getting any more out of client'.
Two different careers. One common theme. Budgeting ... and, without wishing to end up like the JLF in 'Life of Brian', time management (still boiled down to money).
Now, I never went near money in either. I made... make things. But at every stage of my career I have understood the need, and value of accurate estimates. Working with those who drew 'em up.
There were unforeseeables, inevitably. And that's why we had smart cookies figuring out the contingencies to negotiate the contracts, based on accurate parameters.
What the heck has happened?
From Wembley to the 2012 Olympics, it seems you pluck a number out the sky, halve it to win the contract, and then quadruple it so the lawyer fees look only slightly less in comparison.
When it comes to energy, especially nuclear and renewables, I am at a complete loss. With politics and subsidies and targets and agendas muddying and already murky mix.
Black is white. Green is red. Up is down.
As a consumer I just want things quick, cheap, fast and reliable. If I am so minded, I might now throw some ethics in the mix. Those factors are all a juggle. A unit of 'leccy is not very sexy, so I could care less how it arrives or from whom.
Hence, in opting for my supply, I need to know how much, for how long, how often and how well. With some sense on carbon consequences if I feel in the mood to trade some gr££n for some green. Weighing all the options.
It would be nice to have clear, simple charts showing what is front loaded or back loaded, what is more secure because of investment, or what goes into payback and when for the same reason. So I can asses £/kW over a defined set of periods. And if there is a dirty great big plummet (in supply) or soar (in cost) about when my kids are plugging in my blanket because the systems are going off line (decommissioning or exploding gearboxes), I want that in there too. Because it's not fair on them and dumb for me not to be aware.
Now, why is getting that so hard? Or are the massed voices of lobbyists and activists just drowning out any sane long term information (which just must be out there), at least as far as any media I read seems capable of sharing.
It has come to something that I consider our government at best incompetent (what Minister on 6-month rotation could understand the issues) if not corrupt (what MP is going to do what's right today but get 'em bounced tomorrow?), and our media incapable (are there any qualified science reporters any more?) if not venal (ratings trump all), and hence not to be trusted in helping the public understand what it is facing and arrive at a consensus that it will support to drive through what is best for now... and the future.
Before I knew it I was mouthing off...
'Could'. 'Significantly'?
I started life as a Civil Engineer. The unofficial motto was 'Civ. Eng's do for a shilling what any other idiot can do for a pound'.
I then went into advertising, mostly in Asia. The rule there was 'He who goes over approved estimate may dream fondly of getting any more out of client'.
Two different careers. One common theme. Budgeting ... and, without wishing to end up like the JLF in 'Life of Brian', time management (still boiled down to money).
Now, I never went near money in either. I made... make things. But at every stage of my career I have understood the need, and value of accurate estimates. Working with those who drew 'em up.
There were unforeseeables, inevitably. And that's why we had smart cookies figuring out the contingencies to negotiate the contracts, based on accurate parameters.
What the heck has happened?
From Wembley to the 2012 Olympics, it seems you pluck a number out the sky, halve it to win the contract, and then quadruple it so the lawyer fees look only slightly less in comparison.
When it comes to energy, especially nuclear and renewables, I am at a complete loss. With politics and subsidies and targets and agendas muddying and already murky mix.
Black is white. Green is red. Up is down.
As a consumer I just want things quick, cheap, fast and reliable. If I am so minded, I might now throw some ethics in the mix. Those factors are all a juggle. A unit of 'leccy is not very sexy, so I could care less how it arrives or from whom.
Hence, in opting for my supply, I need to know how much, for how long, how often and how well. With some sense on carbon consequences if I feel in the mood to trade some gr££n for some green. Weighing all the options.
It would be nice to have clear, simple charts showing what is front loaded or back loaded, what is more secure because of investment, or what goes into payback and when for the same reason. So I can asses £/kW over a defined set of periods. And if there is a dirty great big plummet (in supply) or soar (in cost) about when my kids are plugging in my blanket because the systems are going off line (decommissioning or exploding gearboxes), I want that in there too. Because it's not fair on them and dumb for me not to be aware.
Now, why is getting that so hard? Or are the massed voices of lobbyists and activists just drowning out any sane long term information (which just must be out there), at least as far as any media I read seems capable of sharing.
It has come to something that I consider our government at best incompetent (what Minister on 6-month rotation could understand the issues) if not corrupt (what MP is going to do what's right today but get 'em bounced tomorrow?), and our media incapable (are there any qualified science reporters any more?) if not venal (ratings trump all), and hence not to be trusted in helping the public understand what it is facing and arrive at a consensus that it will support to drive through what is best for now... and the future.
Everyone has a right to protest ....
.... at something that they disagree with; and (my caveat) providing it is peaceful and sensibly done. But yet again, we have total and utter madness reported as a climate change group hijack a train delivering coal to Drax power station. Full story is from the Guardian.
Sorry, but this is on a par with the animal liberation people freeing thousands of mink a few years ago. These caused absolute devastation to the wildlife within 20 or so miles of the mink farms.
To the people in this Climate Change Action group - I'm all for raising awareness of climate change, but if you want to make a point, make it fairly, sensibly and politely; actions such as hijacking trains make you look like nothing less than outlaws, lunatics and complete idiots. All you will do is alienate yourselves from the man in the street. Go get a life!
Guardian - Addendum (JM) - Is hijacking a train the right tactic? - Methinks some protest to much, and actually get active in more productive ways too little.
Indy - Addendum 2 (JM) - Climate campaigners threaten to invade and shut down power plant - 'Green activists are vowing to force their way...'
Sorry, but this is on a par with the animal liberation people freeing thousands of mink a few years ago. These caused absolute devastation to the wildlife within 20 or so miles of the mink farms.
To the people in this Climate Change Action group - I'm all for raising awareness of climate change, but if you want to make a point, make it fairly, sensibly and politely; actions such as hijacking trains make you look like nothing less than outlaws, lunatics and complete idiots. All you will do is alienate yourselves from the man in the street. Go get a life!
Guardian - Addendum (JM) - Is hijacking a train the right tactic? - Methinks some protest to much, and actually get active in more productive ways too little.
Indy - Addendum 2 (JM) - Climate campaigners threaten to invade and shut down power plant - 'Green activists are vowing to force their way...'
Live... and sucking!
Recently I did a Dragon's Denny kind of effort. A Bristol-based media-business company posted a contest invite to pitch, and I decided to go for it with RE:tie.Well, I ended up on the shortlist! But now you can see how I also managed not to win!
One thing you should bear in mind is the brief, and this one was a bit loose. I had presumed that it was about the idea of course, but mainly about the money. And I know VCs don't get out of bed for less than £1/2M. Hence we had to concoct a scheme whereby I could ask for that much money, justify how it would be spent... and how they, and we, would not only recoup our investment, but then really start coining it. As it turned out, what we came up with, while not the only option, made a lot of sense.
Shame they didn't want to hear about the money, then. I had us on £10k per day for the rest of our lives after just a year. Remember, this was billed as looking for unique new ideas that would be of interest to major investors. But they didn't ask how that would happen.
Not much I can say. They were coming from a very different mindset in about every way. I can't believe that being 'smart', meaning wearing a suit*, is still an issue in getting behind an idea, but there you go. They also, amazingly, almost all seemed amongst the few so far who plain didn't 'get' RE:tie. Funny how so many in business, and especially when one gets to the business of green, operate on the basis of 'Well, I wouldn't'. I'm sure they don't shop in Tescos either, but most folk do. At least they were pleasant, if a bit negative, though I would have wished for more constructive feedback. I got what they wouldn't do, but not much on what they would.
Still, we now have some edited footage and it will get an airing. So possibly worth doing still. Not sure what I would have done differently. But still a valuable opportunity.
Off now to scope the other contestants in companion to see where I went wrong:(
Addendum - There's a blog too. Now all I need to do is find my password!
*Suited and booted?
Interesting.
I could have come in a suit. I do have one. I made the decision not to (a 'Bench' over shirt is still 'smart casual' in my book, especially on a hot day). Poor call, evidently.
It was on a variety of grounds.
First up this was not a typical DD/VC/BA pitch.
As I recall the main aim was to seek a great idea. From all my years in the ad world, great ideas tended to come from folk who didn't see suits as the main point of a productive day. And in the theatre that is presentation, I suspect most of my clients would have been a tad thrown to find a wall of corporate grey drones trying to convince them how to engage with normal folk... teens, kids, Mums, silver surfers... with their messages.
Of course you are also selling a business idea, so it is optimal to have a guy on the team who the money men can identify with. No such option. My bad.
But it is still a worry that the veneer still seemed/s these days to matter more than the substance. I guess such as The Apprentice and most of the UK's government and corporate activities of late have shown how tops the results of this mindset are for the country's fortunes.
I came fully armed with numbers for my financial pitch, if they were required. But as the judges were not going there, this was irrelevant as, surely therefore, was the need to look the part for this aspect?
We all make judgements, on various bases, so I guess dress can serve a function in this.
For my part, I am selling what I know and who I am trying to reach with what I create, and how I understand and identify with them.
Hence the critique from one judge 'Why would I want to do this?' was not a concern: I doubt a free piece of plastic that can save pennies (and planet) would make much difference to a suited and booted finance whizz. But I can understand why packaging for champagne bottles would. More his 'zone' I guess. Oh, did I mention that we had estimated payback of investment within a year, and then £10k per day from then on?
But it is a two-way street. I also need to work with these guys, and have confidence that they 'get' my concept, see its potential and where I am coming from. Makes working together fun... and profitable.
So long as they can prove to me we're on the same page, have a clear vision and strategy to achieve our objectives, I could care less if they were sitting in shorts and a flip flop.
Actually perhaps dress also more appropriate for a late-teen oriented design innovation festival, held in a converted ex-disco in a dirty room with stained windows, if you think about it.
So yes, If I am presenting to a VC in a corporate office or a retail board there will be a suit... if no tie. But I will have a guy in full Armani with me who will be. Here... it wasn't necessary or relevant to the task at hand or the brief I had.
Don't know if you agree on the last bit, but glad you might on the rest.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
NEWS/GO3 - Green goods to come to the front of Britain's shelves
From DEFRA, E& OE: Green goods to come to the front of Britain's shelves
Publishing progress reports on Sustainable Products and Materials and
the Waste Strategy, Climate Change Minister Ms Joan Ruddock has said that the
Government and industry were working together to green the whole life cycle of products and
services - from the raw materials right through to their use and
disposal:
"We know people are concerned about their effect on the environment,
but they don't get to see the full picture of what goes into
producing the goods they buy - and they don't see what happens after
they've thrown them away.
"It needs to be easier for people to buy products that will save them
money and reduce their impact on the environment - and that's exactly
what we're doing. There are real savings to be made - through this
action to green the products and materials we use, UK households
could save £5 billion a year on their bills.
"Many businesses are already taking positive steps to reduce the
environmental impact of their products, and are seeing the real
benefits this can have, both for them and their customers. But as
fuel prices rise, commodities become scarcer, and families are
feeling the pinch, it becomes ever more important for businesses to
use resources more efficiently throughout the supply chain, those
that don't will miss out on potential savings, as well as big
opportunities for growth."
The Sustainable Products and Materials report details, for the first
time, the action already underway on making products and materials
more sustainable throughout their production, use and disposal,
across a wide range of products groups including food, electrical
appliances and clothing.
Significant achievements to date include:
* The piloting of Product Roadmaps, which aim to improve the
environmental performance of ten priority products across their life
cycles;
* Progress towards saving enough energy to power 1.5 million homes by
improving the efficiency of some of the biggest energy using products
- set top boxes, external power supply units (such as for laptops,
mobile phones, and printers), fridges, washing machines, and
dishwashers;
* An initiative with retailers to take inefficient light bulbs off
the shelves by 2011;
* Half of all milk packaging to be made from recycled materials by
2020;
* Government is setting an example for business through our "Buy
Sustainable - Quick Wins workstream." This tightens minimum standards
for public sector procurement. For example most paper used in
Government offices must have 100% recycled content and, where
non-recycled content is allowed, any virgin fibre used must be
sourced from a sustainably managed forest;
* Developing the PAS2050, a recognised standard which enables
businesses to measure CO2 emissions across the life-cycle of
products;
* Leading in Europe to bring the energy used by all standby devices
sold in the EU down to 1 watt - and to halve that again in four years
after that standard is adopted.
The report also sets out a vision for future work on making products
more sustainable, and encourages further debate and discussion on how
this can be achieved.
* UK households could save £5 billion per year from cost-effective
energy efficiency improvements to products.
* Savings from not wasting so much food could be around £420 for the
average UK household. And for households with children it's even more
- £610 a year.
* Confident that with today's technology for metering, tariffs
and water efficiency, per capita consumption of water can be reduced
through cost effective measures, to an average of 130 litres per
person per day by 2030. Hope that developments in new technology
and future innovation will improve the cost-effectiveness of these
measures over time and this can drive consumption down further to an
average of 120 litres per person per day by 2030.
* Energy saving light bulbs can reduce lighting costs by up to £100
over the lifetime of the bulb.
* Initiatives such as moves by major retailers to reduce
environmental impacts demonstrate that resource efficiency is
beginning to be seen as a business opportunity.
The Government is also publishing the "Policy Analysis and
Projections 2008" report which sets out our vision and trajectories
for improvement of efficiency of a range of energy-using products
including light bulbs, refrigerators, boilers and consumer
electronics till 2020 as well as the evidence underpinning our
assessment and challenges to industry for the scale of those
improvements.
A summary of progress made since the publication in May 2007 of the
Waste Strategy is also published today.
It shows good progress in the main indicators, covering waste growth,
recycling and diversion from landfill:
* There is a fall in the amount of household waste produced per
person which is not re-used, recycled, or composted;
* Household recycling rates have continued to increase. Early
indications are that the national average has risen in the first part
of 2007/08 to 33%;
* The amount of commercial and industrial waste being sent to
landfill has continued to fall;
* More energy is being recovered from waste; and
* Less biodegradable waste is being sent to landfill.
Further work is needed to identify whether an increase in reports of
fly tipping incidents represents an increase in fly tipping activity,
or whether it reflects continued improvement in the levels of
information local authorities provide to the Fly Capture national
database. The forecast for 2007/08 anticipates a decrease in fly
tipping levels.
1. The Sustainable Products and Materials progress report is
available here
2. The Waste Strategy progress report is available here
3. Ten product roadmaps to demonstrate the
sustainable products approach are being piloted - milk, fish, clothing, passenger
cars, TVs, domestic lighting, electric motors, window systems, WCs,
plasterboard. Further information on each is available here
4. You can read more about Market Transformation Programme "Policy
Analysis and Projections" here
* By 2020 half of all milk packaging will be made from recycled
materials
*The dairy industry are undertaking
the following measures to achieve them:
* To send zero ex-factory waste to landfill.
* All tertiary packaging is to be re-usable or recyclable
Publishing progress reports on Sustainable Products and Materials and
the Waste Strategy, Climate Change Minister Ms Joan Ruddock has said that the
Government and industry were working together to green the whole life cycle of products and
services - from the raw materials right through to their use and
disposal:
"We know people are concerned about their effect on the environment,
but they don't get to see the full picture of what goes into
producing the goods they buy - and they don't see what happens after
they've thrown them away.
"It needs to be easier for people to buy products that will save them
money and reduce their impact on the environment - and that's exactly
what we're doing. There are real savings to be made - through this
action to green the products and materials we use, UK households
could save £5 billion a year on their bills.
"Many businesses are already taking positive steps to reduce the
environmental impact of their products, and are seeing the real
benefits this can have, both for them and their customers. But as
fuel prices rise, commodities become scarcer, and families are
feeling the pinch, it becomes ever more important for businesses to
use resources more efficiently throughout the supply chain, those
that don't will miss out on potential savings, as well as big
opportunities for growth."
The Sustainable Products and Materials report details, for the first
time, the action already underway on making products and materials
more sustainable throughout their production, use and disposal,
across a wide range of products groups including food, electrical
appliances and clothing.
Significant achievements to date include:
* The piloting of Product Roadmaps, which aim to improve the
environmental performance of ten priority products across their life
cycles;
* Progress towards saving enough energy to power 1.5 million homes by
improving the efficiency of some of the biggest energy using products
- set top boxes, external power supply units (such as for laptops,
mobile phones, and printers), fridges, washing machines, and
dishwashers;
* An initiative with retailers to take inefficient light bulbs off
the shelves by 2011;
* Half of all milk packaging to be made from recycled materials by
2020;
* Government is setting an example for business through our "Buy
Sustainable - Quick Wins workstream." This tightens minimum standards
for public sector procurement. For example most paper used in
Government offices must have 100% recycled content and, where
non-recycled content is allowed, any virgin fibre used must be
sourced from a sustainably managed forest;
* Developing the PAS2050, a recognised standard which enables
businesses to measure CO2 emissions across the life-cycle of
products;
* Leading in Europe to bring the energy used by all standby devices
sold in the EU down to 1 watt - and to halve that again in four years
after that standard is adopted.
The report also sets out a vision for future work on making products
more sustainable, and encourages further debate and discussion on how
this can be achieved.
* UK households could save £5 billion per year from cost-effective
energy efficiency improvements to products.
* Savings from not wasting so much food could be around £420 for the
average UK household. And for households with children it's even more
- £610 a year.
* Confident that with today's technology for metering, tariffs
and water efficiency, per capita consumption of water can be reduced
through cost effective measures, to an average of 130 litres per
person per day by 2030. Hope that developments in new technology
and future innovation will improve the cost-effectiveness of these
measures over time and this can drive consumption down further to an
average of 120 litres per person per day by 2030.
* Energy saving light bulbs can reduce lighting costs by up to £100
over the lifetime of the bulb.
* Initiatives such as moves by major retailers to reduce
environmental impacts demonstrate that resource efficiency is
beginning to be seen as a business opportunity.
The Government is also publishing the "Policy Analysis and
Projections 2008" report which sets out our vision and trajectories
for improvement of efficiency of a range of energy-using products
including light bulbs, refrigerators, boilers and consumer
electronics till 2020 as well as the evidence underpinning our
assessment and challenges to industry for the scale of those
improvements.
A summary of progress made since the publication in May 2007 of the
Waste Strategy is also published today.
It shows good progress in the main indicators, covering waste growth,
recycling and diversion from landfill:
* There is a fall in the amount of household waste produced per
person which is not re-used, recycled, or composted;
* Household recycling rates have continued to increase. Early
indications are that the national average has risen in the first part
of 2007/08 to 33%;
* The amount of commercial and industrial waste being sent to
landfill has continued to fall;
* More energy is being recovered from waste; and
* Less biodegradable waste is being sent to landfill.
Further work is needed to identify whether an increase in reports of
fly tipping incidents represents an increase in fly tipping activity,
or whether it reflects continued improvement in the levels of
information local authorities provide to the Fly Capture national
database. The forecast for 2007/08 anticipates a decrease in fly
tipping levels.
1. The Sustainable Products and Materials progress report is
available here
2. The Waste Strategy progress report is available here
3. Ten product roadmaps to demonstrate the
sustainable products approach are being piloted - milk, fish, clothing, passenger
cars, TVs, domestic lighting, electric motors, window systems, WCs,
plasterboard. Further information on each is available here
4. You can read more about Market Transformation Programme "Policy
Analysis and Projections" here
* By 2020 half of all milk packaging will be made from recycled
materials
*The dairy industry are undertaking
the following measures to achieve them:
* To send zero ex-factory waste to landfill.
* All tertiary packaging is to be re-usable or recyclable
Story telling
Good news to be had here: Wrappers' delight
However, I am not so sure this is the best description of a publicly-funded quango: (Wrap), a private company that helps individuals, businesses and local authorities to reduce waste and recycle more.
And, while true, whether this description of how our money gets spent tells the whole story: 'Lots of major brand owners are becoming converts to this,' Skelton says. He cites Heinz, which has created new lightweight can lids'
However, I am not so sure this is the best description of a publicly-funded quango: (Wrap), a private company that helps individuals, businesses and local authorities to reduce waste and recycle more.
And, while true, whether this description of how our money gets spent tells the whole story: 'Lots of major brand owners are becoming converts to this,' Skelton says. He cites Heinz, which has created new lightweight can lids'
Of course, there are limits. Starting just before what I need to do.
The art of embarrassment
As with all notions that seem initially attractive when applied to others: 'careful what you wish for'.
As with all notions that seem initially attractive when applied to others: 'careful what you wish for'.
QUOTE OF THE DAY - Stats the way, uh-huh
Indy letters - Kudos for publishing
You say (Opinion, 7 July), "Even in wealthy Britain, where food makes up a paltry 9 per cent of average budgets, families are feeling the squeeze from rising food prices".
This sentence is itself an oxymoron but becomes doubly paradoxical in the light of your lead story (same day), in which you say, "The [Cabinet Office] report says UK households could save an average of £420 per year by not throwing away 4.1 million tonnes of food that could have been eaten".
There is either gloss on the statistics, or the British are uniquely stupid; possibly both?
You say (Opinion, 7 July), "Even in wealthy Britain, where food makes up a paltry 9 per cent of average budgets, families are feeling the squeeze from rising food prices".
This sentence is itself an oxymoron but becomes doubly paradoxical in the light of your lead story (same day), in which you say, "The [Cabinet Office] report says UK households could save an average of £420 per year by not throwing away 4.1 million tonnes of food that could have been eaten".
There is either gloss on the statistics, or the British are uniquely stupid; possibly both?
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
EVENT - THE ECOVILLAGE - KENT COUNTY SHOW2008
MONTH - This weekend!!!!
FIELD: Environmental
WHEN: 11th, 12th & 13th July
WHAT: THE ECOVILLAGE - NEW TO THE KENT COUNTY SHOW FOR 2008!!
WHAT... MORE?: Visitors will be able to see and experience the latest developments in environmental products, and speak to experts in green living. But it won’t be all worthy bean eating, there’s plenty of fun to be had being green as well! With almost 50 ‘Ecovillagers’ there really will be something to interest the whole family.
WHERE: Kent Show at Detling
WHO: see site URL
HOW MUCH: Part of the Kent show. Prices here.
URL: http://www.kentecovillage.co.uk/
COMMENTS: We only found out about this just now. In fact Junkk.com was hoping to get there but it's all a bit last minute. But we are cobbling together a little display as the organisers Sust Marketing have kindly offered a slot on their stand. Shame most of our reuse kit is still at the Bristol show, but we'll try and do our best.
FIELD: Environmental
WHEN: 11th, 12th & 13th July
WHAT: THE ECOVILLAGE - NEW TO THE KENT COUNTY SHOW FOR 2008!!
WHAT... MORE?: Visitors will be able to see and experience the latest developments in environmental products, and speak to experts in green living. But it won’t be all worthy bean eating, there’s plenty of fun to be had being green as well! With almost 50 ‘Ecovillagers’ there really will be something to interest the whole family.
WHERE: Kent Show at Detling
WHO: see site URL
HOW MUCH: Part of the Kent show. Prices here.
URL: http://www.kentecovillage.co.uk/
COMMENTS: We only found out about this just now. In fact Junkk.com was hoping to get there but it's all a bit last minute. But we are cobbling together a little display as the organisers Sust Marketing have kindly offered a slot on their stand. Shame most of our reuse kit is still at the Bristol show, but we'll try and do our best.
Ready, aim... er... well, that went well, I think
Great thing, aiming.
G8 aims to halve greenhouse gases
I do recall this all, or something very similar, before, however.
Wonder how many BBC journos flew along to take us for the ride, too.
Indy - An agreement with no commitments
Guardian - Global polluters agree need for cuts in emissions - but not how or when - You know, on that basis, there is a lot I am happy to agree to, too.
BBC - Summit approves climate 'vision' - Yes, it's that vision thing. Needs looking at.. into.
Telegraph - NEW - BBC throwing out food - I do wonder what else they might be accused of, mind
Telegraph - NEW - Let's hope Gordon Brown clears his plate at the G8 - Bless
G8 aims to halve greenhouse gases
I do recall this all, or something very similar, before, however.
Wonder how many BBC journos flew along to take us for the ride, too.
Indy - An agreement with no commitments
Guardian - Global polluters agree need for cuts in emissions - but not how or when - You know, on that basis, there is a lot I am happy to agree to, too.
BBC - Summit approves climate 'vision' - Yes, it's that vision thing. Needs looking at.. into.
Telegraph - NEW - BBC throwing out food - I do wonder what else they might be accused of, mind
Telegraph - NEW - Let's hope Gordon Brown clears his plate at the G8 - Bless
Rules without rulers.
I found this interesting:
ASA - British Sky Broadcasting Ltd t/a Sky
Mainly because, amongst all the rest, of this: '...We understood that there was no generally accepted definition of carbon neutral but that the claim could be evaluated against generally accepted best practice. '
Might it not be a plan for consumers to have one... that makes sense.. and they can trust?
For now, that term means diddly squat to me and washes over like sensible enviro policies on a Government Minister.
I'm also gathering, from look at other judgements, that being told not to run an already expended campaign again is hardly the greatest motivating penalty to not repeat again. POOR Show.
ASA - British Sky Broadcasting Ltd t/a Sky
Mainly because, amongst all the rest, of this: '...We understood that there was no generally accepted definition of carbon neutral but that the claim could be evaluated against generally accepted best practice. '
Might it not be a plan for consumers to have one... that makes sense.. and they can trust?
For now, that term means diddly squat to me and washes over like sensible enviro policies on a Government Minister.
I'm also gathering, from look at other judgements, that being told not to run an already expended campaign again is hardly the greatest motivating penalty to not repeat again. POOR Show.
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
AWARD/COMPETITION - The Zayed Future Energy Prize
WHEN: Deadline for nominations July 31. submissions Sept 30
WHAT: The Zayed Future Energy Prize
WHAT... MORE?: From the site.
With the introduction of the Zayed Future Energy Prize, Abu Dhabi, with its international partners at its side, aims to inspire the next generation of global energy innovators – creating solutions we can barely imagine today.
The Prize will be awarded to three individuals, companies, organisations or NGOs that have made significant contributions in the global response to the future of energy.
The Zayed Future Energy Prize will encompass:
Renewable and sustainable energy sources
* Efficient use of non-renewable energies
* Conservation
* Energy policy
* Communications and public awareness
HOW MUCH: Looks free.
URL: http://www.zayedfutureenergyprize.com/THE-VISION.aspx
COMMENTS: Can't hurt. But make sure you have any IP sorted!
WHAT: The Zayed Future Energy Prize
WHAT... MORE?: From the site.
With the introduction of the Zayed Future Energy Prize, Abu Dhabi, with its international partners at its side, aims to inspire the next generation of global energy innovators – creating solutions we can barely imagine today.
The Prize will be awarded to three individuals, companies, organisations or NGOs that have made significant contributions in the global response to the future of energy.
The Zayed Future Energy Prize will encompass:
Renewable and sustainable energy sources
* Efficient use of non-renewable energies
* Conservation
* Energy policy
* Communications and public awareness
HOW MUCH: Looks free.
URL: http://www.zayedfutureenergyprize.com/THE-VISION.aspx
COMMENTS: Can't hurt. But make sure you have any IP sorted!
Sorely missed
New funding scheme for food packaging innovation
'...a tender process is underway, whereby initiatives from the food manufacturing sector focusing on reusable and refillable packaging, new merchandising and dispensing systems or product reformulation will receive funding for up to 50 per cent of the project costs.'
I guess we must have slipped their mind, what with Junkk.com and RE:tie n' all.
Ah well, back to the pointless proposal pushing. You never know; they might get interested this time.
'...a tender process is underway, whereby initiatives from the food manufacturing sector focusing on reusable and refillable packaging, new merchandising and dispensing systems or product reformulation will receive funding for up to 50 per cent of the project costs.'
I guess we must have slipped their mind, what with Junkk.com and RE:tie n' all.
Ah well, back to the pointless proposal pushing. You never know; they might get interested this time.
NEWS/Commercial PR - Play that funky music, Green boy
Just had to pop this up, if only because I thought disco went out when I was in wide lapels.
PR as provided, E&OE: World's First Eco Disco Launches This Thursday!
CLUB4CLIMATE THIS THURSDAY FOR THE LAUNCH OF
THE WORLD’S FIRST ECOLOGICAL NIGHT CLUB
GRAND OPENING OF SURYA AND LAUNCH OF TEN POINT MANIFESTO
THURSDAY 10TH JULY @ SURYA, KINGS CROSS, LONDON
Each week millions upon millions of exuberant human beings head out of their houses and into nightclubs to expend large amounts of energy on the dance-floor. Mobilising vast social groups each and every week clubbing remains one of the few areas of society untouched by the green message. All this is about to change as Dr. Earth plans to launch the world’s first eco-disco and unveil a 10 point manifesto for all club owners and promoters across the world to adopt and do their bit, however small, towards saving the planet.
On the evening a number of green ambassadors will take to the decks to support Dr. Earth. Jade Jagger needs no introduction. She is the fashion designer du jour and has also stamped her mark on the music industry whilst her partner Dan Williams has been described as ‘the best party DJ ever’ by credible music industry heads such as Bestival’s Rob Da Bank and Radio 1 DJ Pete Tong. World renowned DJ’s, Coldcut whose anti – corporate, anti – authoritarian, ecological vision is well documented have created a special eco AV set for the evening. Queens of Noize unique, chaotic and cool delivery of disco tracks have assured their regal status amongst the current school of Rock n’ Roll DJ’s whilst Nathan Detroit has toured the world with his mix of mash-up music as Fatboy Slim’s support DJ.
Club4Climate and its figurehead Dr. Earth will launch Surya in King’s Cross as the world’s first ecological club, creating a green-print for others to follow. Surya itself will go beyond the concept of sustainability and into the realm of ecology, generating surplus energy to power not only the club but also neighbouring properties. Recognising the need to engender a ‘gentle revolution’ Club4Climate support the notion that it is better to include millions and not just ‘the few’ and that we each have our part to play.
Surya will put its stake in the ground as the first ever-ecological club on the planet, a flagship venture and a pioneer of ecological excellence.
The club will have a unique dance-floor, combining materials such as quartz crystals, ceramics, cutting edge technology and the dancing motion of clubbers to generate part of the club’s energy requirements.
· A wind turbine and a solar energy system will make the club fully sustainable
· An advanced alternative energy system so effective that it will produce a surplus of electricity, which will be freely donated to the private residents closest to the building.
· The club will also be installing the latest air flush, waterless urinals, low flush toilets and automatic taps to ensure maximum water saving plus the latest innovations in ecological air conditioning units.
I'm guessing the water being chugged all night still might not be tap, mind. Can't have everything, I guess.
And I'll be impressed if a Kings X roof and turbine crank up enough juice to have a surplus. I'll be fascinated to check out the system.
Have to be before 10pm, of course. Waaaay past my bedtime.
Greenbang - NEW - London gets eco nightclub - Seems others got the release, too.
PR as provided, E&OE: World's First Eco Disco Launches This Thursday!
CLUB4CLIMATE THIS THURSDAY FOR THE LAUNCH OF
THE WORLD’S FIRST ECOLOGICAL NIGHT CLUB
GRAND OPENING OF SURYA AND LAUNCH OF TEN POINT MANIFESTO
THURSDAY 10TH JULY @ SURYA, KINGS CROSS, LONDON
Each week millions upon millions of exuberant human beings head out of their houses and into nightclubs to expend large amounts of energy on the dance-floor. Mobilising vast social groups each and every week clubbing remains one of the few areas of society untouched by the green message. All this is about to change as Dr. Earth plans to launch the world’s first eco-disco and unveil a 10 point manifesto for all club owners and promoters across the world to adopt and do their bit, however small, towards saving the planet.
On the evening a number of green ambassadors will take to the decks to support Dr. Earth. Jade Jagger needs no introduction. She is the fashion designer du jour and has also stamped her mark on the music industry whilst her partner Dan Williams has been described as ‘the best party DJ ever’ by credible music industry heads such as Bestival’s Rob Da Bank and Radio 1 DJ Pete Tong. World renowned DJ’s, Coldcut whose anti – corporate, anti – authoritarian, ecological vision is well documented have created a special eco AV set for the evening. Queens of Noize unique, chaotic and cool delivery of disco tracks have assured their regal status amongst the current school of Rock n’ Roll DJ’s whilst Nathan Detroit has toured the world with his mix of mash-up music as Fatboy Slim’s support DJ.
Club4Climate and its figurehead Dr. Earth will launch Surya in King’s Cross as the world’s first ecological club, creating a green-print for others to follow. Surya itself will go beyond the concept of sustainability and into the realm of ecology, generating surplus energy to power not only the club but also neighbouring properties. Recognising the need to engender a ‘gentle revolution’ Club4Climate support the notion that it is better to include millions and not just ‘the few’ and that we each have our part to play.
Surya will put its stake in the ground as the first ever-ecological club on the planet, a flagship venture and a pioneer of ecological excellence.
The club will have a unique dance-floor, combining materials such as quartz crystals, ceramics, cutting edge technology and the dancing motion of clubbers to generate part of the club’s energy requirements.
· A wind turbine and a solar energy system will make the club fully sustainable
· An advanced alternative energy system so effective that it will produce a surplus of electricity, which will be freely donated to the private residents closest to the building.
· The club will also be installing the latest air flush, waterless urinals, low flush toilets and automatic taps to ensure maximum water saving plus the latest innovations in ecological air conditioning units.
I'm guessing the water being chugged all night still might not be tap, mind. Can't have everything, I guess.
And I'll be impressed if a Kings X roof and turbine crank up enough juice to have a surplus. I'll be fascinated to check out the system.
Have to be before 10pm, of course. Waaaay past my bedtime.
Greenbang - NEW - London gets eco nightclub - Seems others got the release, too.
REPAIR - The trouble is you'll soon fancy another
I pass this one on as it's certainly worth a try.
My lovely Singapore auntie has passed on a cutting that links to a Yahoo group that I can't access or figure out, so you'll just have to take my version.
Basically if you drop anything electronic - mobile, iPod, Blackberry - in water it's pretty much a goner.
However... there is a last ditch solution: rice.
If it isn't already, switch it off and get it in sealed container of rise asap.
24 hrs later you may find you're back to being good to go.
I am guessing that a container of silica gel will work even better, but you can't eat it afterwards, whereas, depending on where you dropped the thing (loo or a puddle probably not a good idea you might want to risk it.
I figure salt water is pretty much a killer any which way.
My lovely Singapore auntie has passed on a cutting that links to a Yahoo group that I can't access or figure out, so you'll just have to take my version.
Basically if you drop anything electronic - mobile, iPod, Blackberry - in water it's pretty much a goner.
However... there is a last ditch solution: rice.
If it isn't already, switch it off and get it in sealed container of rise asap.
24 hrs later you may find you're back to being good to go.
I am guessing that a container of silica gel will work even better, but you can't eat it afterwards, whereas, depending on where you dropped the thing (loo or a puddle probably not a good idea you might want to risk it.
I figure salt water is pretty much a killer any which way.
Save the trees. And reading.
Ignoring the whole 'servers cooking the planet' counter-argument (which they kinda are/will whatever), this is an interesting thread on paper vs. online.
ONLINE VERSIONS OF MAGAZINES - GOOD? BAD? JUST PLAIN WRONG?
I have note weighed in on the eco aspects as this is not what it's about, but I have to say there is another aspect.
And that is, of the several digital efforts I have subscribed to, I have yet to read one. Just can't seem to get the mood to work with the tech. Yet on a Sunday PM in the garden I hoover through a good dozen.
Go figure.
ONLINE VERSIONS OF MAGAZINES - GOOD? BAD? JUST PLAIN WRONG?
I have note weighed in on the eco aspects as this is not what it's about, but I have to say there is another aspect.
And that is, of the several digital efforts I have subscribed to, I have yet to read one. Just can't seem to get the mood to work with the tech. Yet on a Sunday PM in the garden I hoover through a good dozen.
Go figure.
Monday, July 07, 2008
PR OPPORTUNITY - Ch 4 Show 'Dream Farms'
I've had a call from my chum Tracey at Downshifting Week passing on a potential PR opportunity for any green-minded folk who might fit this bill.
It's from Rachel of production company 'betty':
I am currently researching a 6 part series for Channel 4 called: Dream Farms (working title). The aim of the series is to follow a number of people as they pursue their dreams of leaving city life and stresses behind, in favour of setting up a small holding, or farm. The series would aim to film over the course of a year– so key moments in the farming calendar would be captured. Its early days, but we are very keen to speak to anyone who may be about to embark on such a venture. All types of agriculturally related projects are of interest, from the traditional, to perhaps the more obscure (or becoming less so) Alpaca farming.
Throughout the series we will be looking to enlist an expert, or range of experts, who will be able to offer practical support and guidance to individuals, as they attempt to get their projects off the ground.
As you can tell, it’s quite broad brushed at the moment and I am very open to new ideas and thoughts. Any conversations would initially be for research purposes.
If you think you may meet the brief and are interested, email her direct at Rachel.Hellings@betty.co.uk
It's from Rachel of production company 'betty':
I am currently researching a 6 part series for Channel 4 called: Dream Farms (working title). The aim of the series is to follow a number of people as they pursue their dreams of leaving city life and stresses behind, in favour of setting up a small holding, or farm. The series would aim to film over the course of a year– so key moments in the farming calendar would be captured. Its early days, but we are very keen to speak to anyone who may be about to embark on such a venture. All types of agriculturally related projects are of interest, from the traditional, to perhaps the more obscure (or becoming less so) Alpaca farming.
Throughout the series we will be looking to enlist an expert, or range of experts, who will be able to offer practical support and guidance to individuals, as they attempt to get their projects off the ground.
As you can tell, it’s quite broad brushed at the moment and I am very open to new ideas and thoughts. Any conversations would initially be for research purposes.
If you think you may meet the brief and are interested, email her direct at Rachel.Hellings@betty.co.uk
AWARD/COMPETITION - The PICNIC Green Challenge 2008
WHEN: Deadline July 31
WHAT: The PICNIC Green Challenge 2008
WHAT... MORE?: From the site. SAVE THE PLANET AND WIN €500,000!
The PICNIC Green Challenge is for people who can instigate change- creative and innovative thought leaders and their organisations. Take the challenge!
We're looking for products and services that contribute to an eco-friendly lifestyle, directly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and score highly on convenience, quality and design.
HOW MUCH: Looks free.
URL: http://www.greenchallenge.info/
COMMENTS: I think we tried last year. Can't hurt. Make sure you have any IP sorted!
WHAT: The PICNIC Green Challenge 2008
WHAT... MORE?: From the site. SAVE THE PLANET AND WIN €500,000!
The PICNIC Green Challenge is for people who can instigate change- creative and innovative thought leaders and their organisations. Take the challenge!
We're looking for products and services that contribute to an eco-friendly lifestyle, directly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and score highly on convenience, quality and design.
HOW MUCH: Looks free.
URL: http://www.greenchallenge.info/
COMMENTS: I think we tried last year. Can't hurt. Make sure you have any IP sorted!
Look Out Soup Dragon! Duck Tobermoray!
WALL-E
Looks a hoot. Might even spark a few more Clangers and Wombles.
Indy - Wall-E: One giant beep for mankind
Looks a hoot. Might even spark a few more Clangers and Wombles.
Indy - Wall-E: One giant beep for mankind
Saturday, July 05, 2008
Taking the strain. Or is the p*ss?
Agendas to set. Boxes to tick. Targets to meet.
Eurocrats demand police protection from real world
Our policymakers in action. Note the comment about it being set up to look green but probably acting in addition and parallel to still doing something that is not.
Eurocrats demand police protection from real world
Our policymakers in action. Note the comment about it being set up to look green but probably acting in addition and parallel to still doing something that is not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)