CATEGORY - BIOFUELS

Time to break this out as a separate category.

And also to note that when discussed before (as it is, often), the archiving separates singular from plurals, so you need to check 'BIOFUEL' and 'BIOFUELS' (see links at end) to get the full collection.

I will... one day... try to bring them all under here, but this is where it will all go from now on.

Sunday Times - Biofuels: Fields of dreams - a fair summary to kick off

BBC - Call for delay to biofuels policy

Guardian - Top scientists warn against rush to biofuel

Guardian - Biofuels: a solution that became part of the problem

Food&Drink.com - Nestle chief warns biofuels threaten food supplies - another take... from a surprising source

The Register - Dave of Solarventi has flagged this up in comments: I think it worthy of a main link: Pork and politics energise the biofuel delusion - I really like their contributors' writing style (erring on the very witty, with a touch of sarky), but the sheer logic that their science base makes for compelling argument and opinion. Plus, even if they may not see it in such terms, they are very much in the vanguard of genuine enviROI+ advocacy. I might also have to lob this in the Compost and FWD categories, too.... assuming he's right.

Had to drop a note:

'And the prize for GW claptrap reporting goes, once again to, the BBC.'

To this statement, at the very least... Amen.

Whatever else one might think about the various issues surrounding 'Probably man-worsened climate change', I am still trying to get around our national broadcaster's total lack of irony.

Around the ice shelf story they had no problem advocating moon burials and a crew flying to Midway Island to go beachcombing for plastic to show how a bag ban will solve the various e-crises.

ps: Back on-topic, kudos for a most worthwhile story for those simply keen to avoid waste and reduce unnecessary greenhouse nasties going up - no matter what - 'in the name of green'.

Beverage Daily - Biofuels policy requires focus on sustainability, says CIAA

Guardian CiF - NEW - Fuelling the debate - no post as yet, oddly

Edie - Biofuel demand 'will increase GHGs'

The Register - Boffinry bigwig puts another boot into biofuels - Obviously not a 'pro' piece. Worth reading for some interesting (and funny) science-savvy comments.

Guardian - Demands for crackdown on biofuels scam - (links in piece to other info, some objective facts) The negatives just keep on piling up, which is a pity, as I am sure that in amongst it all there could be a positive angle to tell.. and embrace. I feel for all those who are trying to make businesses out of doing the right thing, in the right way, but will get tarred by a rather broad brush.

Guardian - Germany drops 'roadmap to biofuels' for cars

Guardian - Poor go hungry while rich fill their tanks - Lumme.. the negatives are piling up. I have to wonder if we are getting the true picture or as extreme a swing away as we had to that got the industry in this pickle.

Observer - Darling calls for urgent review of biofuel policies - That'll crack it, a 'review' is 'called for'.

Telegraph - Biofuel potential for commercially grown grass - rare good news?

Guardian - Biofuels: a blueprint for the future? - Not sure I'd call it a 'debate' as billed, but some views from a couple of bods who should know a thing or two. Trouble is, they are pols.

Newsnight & Indy - via Junkk -

Guardian - Fuelling the food crisis

Indy - Why biofuels could actually mean more CO2 emissions - That's a no form the UK's chemists (well CEO of their society), then.

gas2org - Twenty-Two Biodiesel Myths Dispelled -

Guardian - Brazil rejects biofuels criticism - And how. I have popped the Prez' comment as Quote of the Day

The Register - Royal Navy warships could run on sunflower oil - if fresh - 'Make smoke...d herrings, Number One' Actually, some interesting facts!

SAAB - Fuelling the BioPower argument - Bear in mind that this is from a company who makes a car that runs on the stuff.

Times - Biofuel: a tankful of weed juice

Guardian - The biofuel solution - Were it as simple as inferred

Guardian - Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis - Oh, dear. But shush, it's a secret. And soon there will be another report that says teh exact opposite, I'm sure.

The Grocer - Biofuels to blame for food price rises

Observer - Exclusive: we publish the biofuels report they didn't want you to read - I crank an eyebrow at anyything billed thus, mind.

Guardian - UK biofuel 'not up to standard' - That's alsmost 1 in 5! Whe do I suspect getting it to 38% might get billed by some as 100% improved!

BBC - EU in crop biofuel goal rethink

Times - NEW - Pumping the biofuels, from Rio to the Humber

INFORMATION

BBC Green - Sixty-second-guide-to-biofuels

Guardian - Q&A: Biofuels

Renewable Fuels Agency -
Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO)

You are either with 'us', or against 'us'. Apparently.

On this very blog I have had cause to disagree with the protagonist here.

Mark Lynas: the green heretic persecuted for his nuclear conversion

On a variety of green-related issues. Not that: they can be separate, and distinct.

But he has nothing but my sympathies in this turn of events. Even if I may still disagree, in part. If I am allowed.

Careful the enviormental camapaigner who crosses the othordoxy of the main mob.

The responses he has had as an, er, 'Climate change expert' reflect poorly on those who see fit to issue them.

However, I still remain concerned on the disposal of the waste.

Moguls ahead!

I often (and possibly unfairly) allude to those telling others what not to do often being a tad shy on giving up the next ski weekend.

Can you ski and be green?

Beats yellow, I guess.

Junkk is 'Blue Peter on steroids'

Always liked that quote.

Anyway, reading the Times today I came acrosss this, which seemed worth a share by way of an homage.

It's where I ended up after clicking an ad/icon.

Oddly, I'm not clear on what one is meant to do to find out more, which I would have liked to do.

Fine, maybe. But let's not forget.

The EU's Renewables Directive: unworkable and costly

Slightly O/T but related, as I read this at the same time as my council may have to dip into my wallet to pay for the landfill misses.

Just how many 'targets' are there, irrespective of any actual value they may have as an actual enviROI that helps my kids' futures, that 'we', the tax/ratepayer have been set up to fund the fines for? By whom? And where does this protection racket money go to if (no doubt) and when paid over by those who arranged it all on our behalves?

BBC - UK opposes green aviation target - The Gord caveth, and the Gord diggeth in?

Sling it

As my home for several years, I can testify that Singapore has much to offer.

Singapore slings out tradition and welcomes the bright lights of F1

This... especially at the moment, ain't one.

How to spoil a Friday

Sometimes it's good to share. This is not one of those times.

Pandora: BBC faces Ofcom row over interview edits

I share this not to give ammo to those would use it in defence of a rather extreme climatically optimistic view (which it will, even though it is just about reporting standards), but in the hope that the Nixonian notion of 'don't get caught' rarely applies. If you don't want your dirty laundry hung out for all to see... don't soil it.

If (it still looks in the realms of "what might be", but the Indy is not a great fan of those from a CO viewpoint and has chosen to share) this pans out as billed I must again raise my eyes to the heavens at the sheer, unprofessional ineptitude of those who are allowing personal or corporate agenda corrupt the spirit of objective information sharing.

And 'But Ch4 did it first!' won't cut it outside of my licence fee demand.

Who are these folk? How are they paid? Why? Is there ever an accounting?

Just lay all it all out honestly and let the public decide. The minute you start figuring you know better, then try and rig it, and then get caught, it just makes everything a whole lot worse to try and explain for those working along, steadily sharing what we know, what we think we know and what we don't. And then what we think might help now, just in case.

It will be interesting to see if this escalates as billed. If proven it has to. If not, then it will rumble along anyway I'm sure. But it would have never been an issue if the desire in some quarters to 'enhance the narrative' had not overcome professional standards.

Thank heavens I do not have to pay... for.. all... th..

Oh.

Daily Mail - QED. BBC investigated after peer says climate change programme was biased 'one-sided polemic' - That's how many million choking up their meat & two veg in suburbia?

Broadcast - BBC2 show ignites contributor row

Gaurdian - NEW - The battle caused by Climate Wars

For some reason, the author has posted this in the Guardian (I usually enjoy having a debate there, but on this issue it's really not worth it. I've just left one where 'they' are asking why someone who might have a different view to the group is allowed on, and to voice an opinion. Bless):

I must say it makes for an interesting read, even if some links to 'a bloke's blog' seems rather... unconvincing in support.

I must say on first reading I was unclear (great communicators that they are: 'Maybe that's our fault for not being clearer' - that's what £3.5B gets you, I guess) whether he was saying the climate debate was a done deal, or it wasn't..'...even if the scientific consensus is that global warming is a reality', '..makes clear, it is that there is still a furious debate going on out there.'

As to the rest, with bitter irony it mostly makes this committed environmental campaigner weep... or feel like buying a Hummer.

IDEA - Voucher Tree

This, I hope, can be the start of something big.

Let me quote from some PR going out, which I hope will explain:

Sow What?

Local schools and businesses team up to make the most of national retail chain promotional opportunity

Have you got a bunch of vouchers still in your kitchen draw from some supermarket promotion that was over last year? It seems such a pity that these opportunities to get free stuff to the benefit of the local community, especially when they are our schools, often pass by without really being taken advantage of fully.

Well, a locally-organised community collaboration has been launched to try and avoid any such waste this time, and help our nearby schools too.

Shoppers in Ross may have noticed that Morrisons supermarket is running a 'Let's Grow' promo, whereby your purchases can generate free vouchers that your school can use to buy gardening equipment.

There have been many such similar schemes before, but how easy is it to pop these in you wallet at checkout and then never get them to the right person at the right school to be of use?

Well, meet the 'Voucher Tree'. Made by local re:use-advocacy voluntary Junkketeers from old packaging, the 'Voucher Tree' will be available for you to post vouchers when in around town shopping.

Initially, local environmental social enterprise EnviroAbility have kindly offered to place one in their Cantilupe Road shop.

They will then make sure they get to the school you specify (each 'coconut' lists a local choice, plus a generic one whose contents will be divided equally) at the end of the promo.

It is very much hoped that the store itself will also soon be able to have one behind the checkout rows so it can be a simple ‘shop and pop’ in one smooth motion as you leave. But first head office approval is being sought before this will be possible.

As an interesting aside, with some experience in such charitable endeavours, Dennis Humble of EnviroAbility has advised that for some reason many customers still turn down such free vouchers even when offered at the till. Hopefully this initiative, and any publicity that may be generated, will result in higher responses through better awareness combined with more immediate and convenient ways to get the vouchers where they will do most good.

So, when you shop, remember when they ask if you'd like your vouchers – please think 'Sow What' and then come and add them to the tree.

The scheme runs until November 6th.

Now, what we're hoping is that the big guns at Head Office see opportunity staring them in the face. It's happening with or without them. With is better for all, all round.

Because... there's more sinking in:

As an interesting aside, with some experience in such charitable endeavours, Dennis has advised that for some reason many customers still turn down such free vouchers even when offered. Hopefully this initiative, and any publicity that may be generated, might result in higher responses through better awareness combined with more immediate and convenient ways to get the vouchers where they will do most good.

If it works here in Ross, it is hoped it may catch on elsewhere in the county and country and with other promos, too. Hey, it’s a free and easy way to get free and useful stuff to help the community!

If anyone wants to copy the “Voucher Tree” just go to Junkk.com and look in the 'Ideas Section'. But feel free to adapt and/or improve!

OK, this is no longer funny...

... well, of course it is, really. Hilarious frankly. But I still have this sneaking suspicion that Dilbert is using this blog for ideas.

Rewind, review and really enjoy.

ps: some of my best friends are... will be Directors of Green, I hope:)

AWARD - Rushlight Awards 2008

WHEN: 31 October 2008
WHAT: Rushlight Awards 2008

WHAT... MORE?: The Rushlight Awards are a unique set of awards designed to celebrate and promote UK and Irish organizations that are developing environmental technology and innovation. The categories cover renewable energy, clean fuels, power generation, waste, water and pollution management, including a number of new award categories for 2008 such as nuclear, energy efficiency and water management.

HOW MUCH: There is a 20% discount off the entry fee (£100) for members of the supporting partners and readers of the media partners’ publications.
URL: http://www.rushlightawards.co.uk/
COMMENTS: A new one to us, but the pedigree looks very impressive. Not the cheapest but by no means the most expensive. We are thinking of having a crack ourselves.

Tyred and emotional

Scrap Values

Ready, aim.. missed. Off to another meeting, guys!

The strange science of setting targets

If it's anything, it's an art. If a rather dubious one. The Damien Hirst of social breast-beating as a veneer over rampant self-interest, where you might get to fool the 'smart set' to fork out bazillions for a rotting corpse as it keeps a lot in work even if no one actually benefits.

On the one hand, I accept the need for measures, whereby you can assess what you are aiming for (and have agreed with others), how you're doing en route (in case corrective actions are needed) and how well all involved performed in meeting them.

However, these days, when I hear the word 'targets', and all the associated waffle from those with a box-ticking, bonus-addicted, media-ratings reason to deal in them, I rather switch off.

Perhaps because they, and the industries surrounding them, have been totally discredited?

Jobs for the boys, and girls. Makes you green with envy, eh?

Labour's shocking CO2 admissions

I am, I must admit, still trying to get my head around who actually funds my having my own personal waste / compost advisor / bin checker / sustainability executive / WEEE consultant as I don't think that their pay and pension is covered by them producing anything that actually generates income. Or the vast comms budgets that accompany their roles in Gov, LAs, Edu or quangos.

I know these are not 'meant' to be included in the noble list suggested, but why do I feel they might? I sense, with dread, a pen hovering over a box.

I am wondering who the last poor soul left in the UK will be who is making anything that creates enough wealth enough to support all who need to feed of their taxes.

The right person for the job

We're on a roll.

Well, it's certainly true that when life serves of lemons, there are those who can have fun whilst making lemonade.

And as a lot of what ails seems to come from 'politics' (though not just in government), I have recently learned a trick or two.

For instance, if you want to get across something, but don't want to be nailed to or by it too closely (just in case), you refer to what another may have said without comment, in passing, like.

Oh look, I wonder what the genius Dilbert might be saying today...

Proof that it can pay to recycle..

From my lovely wife (and a series of others back to its genius, if sadly now 'anon' originator):

> If you had purchased £1,000 of Northern Rock shares one
> year ago, they would now be worth £4.95.
>
> If instead you had purchased HBOS shares, earlier this week
> your £1,000 would have been worth £16.50.
>
> If you'd invested in XL Leisure your £1,000 would now
> be worth less than £5.00.
>
> However if you'd bought £1,000 worth of Stella Artois
> one year ago, drank it all, then took the empty cans to an
> aluminium re-cycling plant, you would currently get £214.
>
> Based on the above statistics the best investment advice I
> can give you is to drink heavily and recycle.

'The journey of two thousand more ideas starts with the first second use concept'

All a bit 'doom and gloomy' on the economy front at the moment, so it's nice to share a bit of breaking, ongoing and all-round re-evolving news from Junkk Towers!

Frequent readers of this blog will recall that a wee while ago we were rather chuffed that budget family retail (you know, the ones who are now doing better and better in the current, if sadly looking more and more austere economic climate) chain Poundland had got in touch to say they liked what we're up to, thought re:use was well worth promoting as another 'green' option, and hoped it was OK if they pointed at our site as a way for folk to seek alternative options to the bin and landfill with what they buy.

Well, having recently already noticed a few, we have to say often rather confused/incredulous sign-ups already already on the site, we were pleased to a few days ago at last make these nice folks' acquaintance.

Seems a bit grand to call it a 'meeting', but we had a good chat with both the packaging and PR division heads, and whilst the order of the day is till 'softly-softly' baby steps, we're rather excited at what can, and hopefully will be done by them, by Junkk.com and the two organisations together.

Somewhat of a priority is to get as many bits of data and/or ideas as we can up on site to help and/or inspire those who are tempted our way by the URL on pack. This does actually get rather daunting as we have been told that there is the order of 2,000 lines coming on stream.

Anyway, the journey of two thousand more ideas starts with the first second use concept, so here's one I made just before the progamme (er, blog - you know Junkk is on record as 'Blue Peter on steroids, right?) having been given a sample of the coming Xmas range:

http://www.junkk.com/junkkdetail.asp?slevel=0z622&parent_id=622&renleewtsapf=1858

So... the first, perhaps not the best (yet), but then it won't be the last. All you need to do is engage (left) brain and see what transpires.

Ideally...

It needn't cost the earth

A few good points to a well meant article.

I'd just offer that instead of trying to be 'green' (whatever that is) but being allowed to be and (as you say) properly supported in becoming green-er would, as any baby knows, make the steps easier to cope with, learn and seek to master if not improve upon.

Being slammed with all-or-nothing from what is more and more looking like a truly double-standard ridden 'industry'... not so much.

Why I love research. And newspapers. And activists. And...

Maybe in different ways for different reasons, mind.

Green idealists fail to make grade, says study

Amazingly, from the Gaurdian.

Have celebrity, will travel

It has already been noted that 'environment' is creeping down the agenda.

Even on Aunty it hasn't cropped up in a while.

So I guess there is no one around to concern themselves with all these celebrities and crews off hither and thither to raise awareness on this and that. Just two today.

Message and messengers again. While the topics may be valid, when Zoe Ball tells me Mrs. Brown and hubby are with her off to sorts things out elsewhere I am not sure my reaction is the one being sought.

At least she dodn't seem to have a book/show to sell.

Rule 1: If it seems obvious to you, it may still not be

Environmentalism needs to take account of cost

While I can only agree, and applaud the sober attempt to articulate and expand upon this, I fear I still have my first thought ringing in my ears:

'Well...D'Uh!'

But then, maybe it does need repeating. Seems an awful lot have not connected a few rather basic dots. Just so long as in getting from ROI to enviROI those coming from a more bean-counting, as opposed to bean-eating, viewpoint don't ignore the social aspects of our continued healthy existence on this planet in the rush to make even more green by now being, or being seen to be it.

In the 'no'

In many ways this is more appropriate for the more political 'El Burro Hotay' sister blog.

Especially today, as our Dear Leader articulates his vision for the future (for the next 10 years?) at the Labour Party Conference.

Thing is, I have come to feel that people, myself often included, seem 'persuaded' by those who claim to know all (and actually know sod) above those honest enough to say they are not too sure, especially about things in the future which, often, and by obvious examples in the past, are hard to predict with accuracy.

Pity.

Talk... or action?

The methane time bomb

Whatever your climate change combo of choice (man-made, nature only, etc), I would imagine few would argue that methane being released is not a good thing.
Now... is this rather serious, and relatively immediate concern going to be tackled directly, with thought and deed, or will it just get rolled into the ongoing, endless debate about 'global warming' and calls to devote money (in large amounts) to combat 'it'? And oodles on 'awareness', of course.

As with the logic of not cutting down trees (ok, it is inaction, but still counts) that surrounds deforestation as part of the totality, I rather feel this little scenario rather deserves some thought perhaps not so much on stopping it (which seems unlikely as any global fix is still being discussed endlessly) by dealing with it.

No idea how, even if it is possible. But if we can cover half the Atlantic in plastic maybe that's an avenue for here, with a a hole connected to a pipe to capture and then use it.

(Sadly the replies to the theme have tended to fall into the 't'is/t'isn't' camp already.)

I didn't have space to raise the point in more detail, but by way of contradiction/devil's advocacy there is also the need to understand the problem more, or at least to the point that addresses the enviro vs. ecomomic challenges. Still huge, but maybe more manageable than dealing with the whole planet.

Indy - The ultimate gas leak that scientists have long dreaded

Indy Letters - NEW - Methane threat to the climate

In the article "The methane time bomb" (23 September), the common misconception is reiterated that methane is "a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide". In fact the situation is worse than this, and methane is actually around 100 times more potent than CO2.

If equal masses, say one tonne each, of CH4 and CO2 were emitted simultaneously into the atmosphere, over 100 years the effect of methane would be 20 times that of CO2, 60 times over 20 years but 100 times when their warming potential is compared directly. If both methane and CO2 are being emitted continually, rather than as one-off events, the factor of 100 is the more salient.

Thus, alarming though the tale of the melting permafrost is, as told, its consequences may prove far worse. Runaway melting of permafrost will almost certainly cause a steady or accelerated release of methane over decades, and so climate models will need to be compensated.

Professor Chris Rhodes

CATEGORY - COMMERCIAL/PROMO 'GREEN' SITES

With a suggestion to keep eyebrows cranked ready for any signs of greenbait or greenwash, at least there can be freebies:

generationgreen.co.uk - from British Gas
savetodaysavetomorrow.com - from edf (see a theme here?)

Note: I might forget in time, so make sure any you check have not expired.

Cold Comfort

Loopholes in £1bn insulation plan mean millions struggling with ‘fuel poverty’ will lose out

Aren't loopholes what dodgy folk use to get out of Government obligations; not the other way round?

Despite my wife's best efforts, thanks to Junkk.com and RE:tie's investment/return plot I think we might have qualified, except..

For example, any home with more than 60mm of loft insulation will not qualify for the scheme The recommended standard is 270mm. - er, tick

Nor will most homes built before the 1930s, which are unsuitable for cavity-wall insulation. - tick, again.

Two strikes and we're already out.

“It’s a classic piece of government spin — it sounds great, but it is actually a completely unworkable plan,”

However, looks like we're not the only ones with not as much as we could have upstairs.

Jobs for the boys, and girls

Green growth is the path to economic recovery

An interesting essay, as are some of the comments in reply.

You'll wonder where the yellow went

Well, strike one for planet... and pocket.

For a while now we have had a policy of 'When it's yellow, let it mellow' when it comes to flushing practice.

The boys have been on baord, mainly because they usually forgot anyway and now they had an excuse. I just have becoem a bit more keen since we had the water meter installed.

She who must be obeyed was never keen.

Anyway, one warm day (and we haven't even had the heating on yet), a less used little boys room and an early return from work on Friday means that from now on we're back to 'once in the loo, pull the handle too, and not just for... well, you can guess the rest'.

Tricky, this green lark.

Numbers games

I debated a wee while before plumping for this blog to post upon.

It's nothing to do with enviro issues (well, a tad), but does go to reaching audiences.

Americans get the internet, and are British bloggers' best market

I just found the numbers interesting.

Not just the ones quoted (which is how they attract, and get paid by advertisers), but just a few observations of my own in complement.

I blog prodigioulsy here, but I also often get moved to comment elsewhere.

It just seemed intriguing to me that the author got/gets 65k weekly visitors, yet only 7 commented here for instance. Meanwhile over at the Guardian blog I posted a few days back on the Clean Technology 100, so far... zippy. OK, maybe my crass punt was a put off, but no one else reading felt like lobbing in a wee hello too?

All these folk lurking, with so little to say.

I just have to figure out how to seduce them over here... and then how to make a crust having doen so.

Quote of the day - it doesn't always need to look black

If from an ironic source (the person, not the piece), all things considered, currently:

“Don't find fault, find a remedy. Anybody can complain.”

Henry Ford

News from the retail front

I have had of late to get a bit closer to the innermost workings of the retail world than is healthy.

And a few things have become clear: the shenanigans of their marketing would do Machiavelli proud, and the corporate structures are so rigid, and the level of fear of making a mistake so palpable so as to make the Russian military look like an anarchists' brainstorming session.

A few months ago we approached the manager of our local supermarket with a proposal to hold a little research on shoppers attitudes to packaging by using the RE:tie as the focus. It would help us get data, him get PR, and the store some 'we care about the future' kudos. Win-win-win.

He was well up for it. But... he needed to run it by head office. To OK a stand in the local carpark.

Several months and countless cross shuntings and requests for more and more info (Ans: 'Er, we'd have a table, and we'd ask if folk would see merit in second use ideas being put in pack designs. Maybe like the way Innocent did it, with a 'Yes/no' bin you pop bottles in. Bit of fun, really. Bound to get the local press covering it') from a bevvy of backside-concerned minions later, we got our answer.. from board level: No, best not.

Bless.

So I wonder how many person hours in meetings this bit of genius required:

The Grocer - Tesco Extra takes bags under the counter

'Don't ask..don't tell'. Hey, it works in the military!

Talking Retail - Tesco Extra pushes plastic bags under the counter

MRW - Tesco introduces 'bag on demand' initiative

PRW - NEW - Tesco points scheme cuts bag use - This, however, adds up

Plugging away*

Clean technology 100

Don't know if it counts, but...'...don't try, don't get...'

http://www.junkk.com/ - finding uses for rubbish

Leading to:

http://www.junkk.com/junkkdetail.asp?slevel=0z622&parent_id=622&renleewtsapf=1828

A bit like another cable tie idea in the news today, but sadly not yet as Dragon Den-friendly. Though we'd like to think it also offers business, consumers... and planet certain benefits.

*Sorry, had to go first.

And why not..?

A wee bittie too much doom and gloom around. Time for a wee boost of +vity:)

Meet the CarrotMob

Forget negative campaigning, why not reward green businesses instead - Yay!

...with a group spending spree? - Oh, that's us out then:(

Carrotmob.com

PLAYING THE PERSON - how not to serve the future

On a more than slightly Climate Optimistic blog (all sides need to be understood) I frequent this review was posted:

When I Am King

Which garnered this by way of slick rebuttal. By, no surprise, 'Anon':

'And Delingpole's qualification's for commenting on scientific matters are? He even decribes the programme presenter as a 'Doctor of Geology'. Thee is no such thing.'
I fear a green mist descended:

As it is so critical to some... er... one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iai...ki/ Iain_Stewart

Holy heatwaves! He is not a Doctor of Geology, he is.. a Senior Lecturer instead.

This obviously undermines any credibility a subjective (if one-sided, sort of by definition) humourous critique might have on the value of this person's programme and how it may play with a non-scientific audience.

Sod the arguments pro and con... the critic got the main protagonist's title wrong!!!

I am a committed environmental campaigner, and subscribe to the notion of 'Probably Man-worsened negative climate change, so it's possibly best to find out what we can and then do what's practical and possible to deal with the potential consequences before it's too late.'

OK, it's not as snappy as 'Global warming' but seems to me a bit more accurate scientifically and may even serve to act as a better basis for helping the vast majority of the public to understand the issues, make their own minds up and, if so motivated, DO what they can to help self, others and future.

So I also passionately believe in the power of persuasion as a tool, through education, fact, logic, debate, sharing, understanding and empathy.

I DO NOT see any merit to the cause of encouraging environmentally positive behaviours though the mindset of 'I'm/we're right. If you disagree you're wrong. And it's our ball, pitch and everything in it, so nar-nee-na-na until we bludgeon you into seeing things our... 'correct' way'.

And this is typified by any, and I mean any eyebrow crank on dogma, and/or its various publicists' methods, getting slapped back with totally facile counter-argument. Pretty much top of this list - which never works and simply serves to undermine credibility still further - is to play the person rather than the ball in an irrelevant manner.

Dr. Stewart - scientist, and climate change programme maker: qualified, eligible and well capable of dishing out and taking science-related bouquets and brickbats

Mr. Delingpole - humourist writer and commentator on TV and how it relates to the public: eligible and well capable of dishing out and taking media writing-related bouquets and brickbats

Such as Roger Harrabin, the face of climate change to 60M UK citizens via our objective national news reporting broadcast medium - arts graduate yet (I may have his title a bit wrong, so sue me) environment analyst: questionably qualified, not really eligible and well capable of dishing out if not taking science-related bouquets and brickbats.

At least he is now joined by Dr. Stewart, but some might argue this hardly adds to the heft of the BBC's output on this critical issue, nor indeed the level of balance.

In their little airmiles-cranking bubble ('But... I flew to the Artic to do this piece to camera to raise awareness'!) it might all seem tickedy boo, but whatever a late-night BBC2 or Guardian piece might do for the already converted (though the level of slap being laid on in these major-lite media almost makes even me want to buy a Humvee) hardly serves when hung out to dry in media that do reach a slightly broader audience.

I know that the green-elite ('you don't get backstage at the concert like we do') 'Coven of Climate Concern' wishes the likes of the Daily Mail, Sun/Clarkson or Ch4 'Axis of Denial' did not exist, but they do. Live with it.

Then work around that fact... and their much bigger, more influential (I know they are deemed unworthy of votes in some quarters by never coming up with the 'right' result, but it's still a democracy... just) audiences.

People join you if they like the invitation; not if you threaten them if they don't.

Me, I'm now off to do my thing, make a few more fun things, and share what I'm up to to try make a bit of dough, feed the family and with luck make the future for them a bit better by being a good provider, slightly less selfish world citizen (I hope) and example (I need the audience ratings).

http://antigreen.blogspot.com/ - Sept 18

http://climatescience.blogspot.com/2008/09/earth-climate-wars.html

http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/09/biased-broadcasting-climate.html 4:

Caan Do

Just watching James Caan, Dragon's Den entrepreneur, on the BBC News.

I do note that he has a book to sell, but he comes across as a rather charming bloke.

However, I do note major reference to a product he backed, called the 'Rapstrap', by another nice, lucky chap, Andrew Harsley. It is a cable tie variant. Using existing polyprop grade plastic and part-selling on eco-savings.

I think I need look into this. It's not like there is not a precedent.

PROFS POSER - Idle talk saves planets

This is the 'inspiration':

Stuck at a level crossing? Turn off the engine or pay £20 fine

Thing is, if you are not in Prius or snazzy Beemer, when is the right time to switch off, and even if there is one (there must be, like for flourescent bulbs) how can it be assessed in advance (ever switched off in a jam afater 5 minutes, only to find that's when it moves off?).

Thing is, I have an old wife nagging that says starting ans stoping uses 'more' (over a period tba) than shutting down.

All the research that's fit to print

WRAP research shows four main barriers to recycling

The study found that the barriers are:

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

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

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

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

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

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

We shall fight then in the malls, we shall fight them in the car parks...

Lib Dems oppose eco-towns, back CCS and £2,500 ‘4×4′ tax

Just wondering and all (it's not covered here but may be elsewhere), but when 'Transport spokesman Norman Baker proposed road taxes of up to £2,500 per year on gas guzzling 4×4s, which would help fund £1,000 payouts to those buying more fuel efficient cars', where any plans in place to help my neighbours here in the country who use them on their farms? And when this aspect of car industry collapses through there being insufficient market to warrant production (along with local food production, possibly), I question how well our troops gad about various un-tarmac'd hotspots in armoured Priuses.

Not saying certain areas don't need addressing, but have to say I am a little nervous about the priorities and focus and capabilities of those who would choose to lead outside a rather small village in London.

From your other post they may have a rethink on CCS, but nice to see they suss the wind is blowing on 'eco' (they almost come with quotes now as standard, eh?) towns.

Another day, another 'Day'

It's more a 'why not' than a BTN, but I will still pass it on:

National Carbon Footprint Day

I will pass personally however, as I do most other such days, weeks, pledges, etc. They tend to blur into one another, and I am coming to wonder what the total enviROI adds up to vs. not having any at all, and simply applying the cash and energy to doing more enviro stuff than getting on the awareness/measuring roundabout. And I am still rather unclear what a carbon footrpint is.

But I guess some need rallying points. So here is another, neatly hyperlinked for your convenience: www.nationalcarbonfootprintday.org

NEWS/GO3 PR - Greenprofs.com Directory

Just been told of a new directory that looks well worth being part of if you qualify:

greenprofs.com

And the best part is that it is our favourite kind.... free!

Junkk lauds LA councillor shock!

Barmy bureaucratic bin laws make a mockery of justice says Enfield councillor and magistrate

Go, Tel.. go!

But seriously, this does show such 'initiatives' are not just the scares whipped up by the tabloids.

Data, and how to use it...

Had a few dealings with NISP, and they seem to have a better idea than some...

NISP data may kickstart government waste campaign

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

WRAP seeks packaging partner

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

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

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

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

Effective mixed plastics collection needed in UK

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

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

EU new car CO2 rules

The EU's rules on all new cars averaging CO2 emissions of under 130 g/km now look as if they are not going to come to pass, as the EU's own internal legal committee has declared the new rules to be illegal, according to this from AutoWired.

Oh, the joys of large scale bureaucracy. You simply couldn't make this up, could you?

PROF'S POSER - Don't chill, man?

For once the question is answered as posed (well, presuming the answer(s) provided by the author below are universally agreed).

Is it better to buy canned or frozen food?

I had actually thought fresh was best, but allowing this option to be a given (or...is it? If an NZ lamb can have a better enviROI than near home... as I have heard it suggested).

The points on freezing being an ongoing energy draw are well taken (which is why we have decommissioned one big effort to no more than an insulated larder in fvaour of a wee one to keep the ice cream and a few other, er, 'essentials'), and the recycling aspect of cans is 'interesting' (another PP on the ground to ground cycle of steel/alumimium per gram of food vs. a plastic sack). As to chilled, well, today I fear I (other 3 not too keen) might well enjoy a salad sideplate with lunch, and mostly for coneveince, but also with a hat-tip to waste (too many soggy, smelly, leaves ejected if not used that day), it may well be an option I still consider.

Priorities People

Indy - The City and keeping the rainforests alive

'Rainforest is worth 75 times more alive than dead.'

'..more good for the cause of climate change than any amount of carbon sequestration projects, wind farms, electric cars, and so on.'

And this is tucked away here because...?

Is there a ban-wagon looming that needs front page treatment more?

The rain in Oz..

...is not was.

My concerns are still more about reporting standards than bias as such, but I have to wonder about this from the BBC email digest:
Wind power speed record bid fails A team hoping to break the world land-speed record for a wind-powered vehicle blames global warming for its failure.

Once you get in at least it settles back on 'climate change'.

I happen to be one that thinks it is daft to trade hot and colds, wet and drys on a year by year basis when dealing with climatic or geographical issues, and hence get rather frustrated when those of a more climate pessimistic bent, and their supporters in the media, throw such things about with gay abandon to try and make cases that seem almost set up to be demolished.

I fear that all I could think was that lack of wind seemed a new one on me, and hard to equate with some reports only the other day with increased hurricane activity. And was it not so long ago there was a lack of rain in Oz? (I am one who will admit to thinking that such extremes are worth wondering about, but not yet ready to pin on man as the only cause).

Can't they all just belt up 'til they, and the rest of us, have a slim chance of knowing what the heck might be going on?

This kind of thing just makes even folk like me want to kick back, which surely has to be counter-productive to their charter-busting, social-re-engineering, subjective agendas.

A plug for plugs

Thanks to a post on a blog, I have been introduced to this:

Plug-in hybrid boosts electric motoring

Of course, I have been moved to write:

I have noted that there are some well-informed contributors here whose education and experience in technical matters I have come to trust more than almost any BBC 'analyst' I have to pay for, especially when overseen by editorial selection by agenda rather than objective fact.

This is an interesting and in many ways exciting story as we confront a future of ever-reducing fossil fuels.

Now I have to confess I fully accept that in an urban setting an internal combustion engine, especially running at idle (though a lot of ads I see - BMW - seems to suggest this can be addressed with ic too) is looking less and less ideal.

But then we need to consider urban and non-urban usage in totality. Being that most of these 'reports' are in the city, by the city and of the city (where one trusts, for the sake of one's charging reliability unless you post an armed guard at the parking bay, no local lads have a pair of tin snips), the whole thing seems to focus on this aspect, ignoring those who live and work in the country and have to pile up and down motorways. I am really hoping that the mindset in luvvie central is not a Prius or G-Wiz in the garage for the CC, and then one jumps in the Range Rover to get to Hay-on-Wye to discuss global warming. Frankly, in the city, why does anyone need a car at all? At least the caption on the wee orange jobbie raises the dilemma that presents. To meet my family/work needs/desires we have to plump for one Volvo estate, which we're looking at converting to LPG (which seems better for planet, and pocket if they don't monkey with the fuel taxes). Many (not all) of these things seem only suitable for singles or in combo with others.

I was thrilled to see that at least we no more have a moppet gurgling that electric is 'pollution free'.

But I'd still just like to know how 'environmentally-better' this option is beyond reduced localised pollution, and against all other options, including hydrogen. I am already wondering about the costs and wisdom of pursuing two such options at once, as the infrastructures are surely going to compete and hence dilute the possible eco-benefits of reduced Co2 emissions (which I gather is the main 'problem') NOW?

Ignoring for now the costs of getting the power of these new sources of energy to the wheels (isn't 'leccy soaring? No wonder our Vince at EDF is a fan, er, 'sous la lune' as we say not in the UK'. Seems also that nuke energy is coming in as a dun deel as I'm guessing the Kingsnorth half dozen have done for coal), I would love to know a bit more about the enviro claims, as that is how they come across here... just claims: if the wording of this, again from an EDF (does the BBC have shares?) rep is scrutinised more closely:

'Toyota's plug-in hybrid offers a 40% reduction in overall CO2 emissions compared with conventional petrol vehicles, according to Mr Hofman.'

I'm sorry, but this reads less and less like an objective report, and more and more like a PR for a bunch of various folk who have a fair bit of dosh to make from taking this direction.

No problem at all with that if it also serves my kids' futures well (by their own definitions of what is important to reduce, now), but not so great if this is just helping a bunch of folk use green, and the BBC's unthinking 'anything that claims to be green is good' to jump on a bandwagon.

Any proper tech/eco/economic insights appreciated. Grin:) (as all involved seemd to share their wisdom with them if you read the piece.

With luck I may get some feedback, and will share any that helps.

It also gives me another new acronym: PR As News - PAN Reporting.

Indy Letters - Been here before

I am old enough to remember both the fanfare that accompanied the launch of the Sinclair C5 – an electric vehicle boasting cutting-edge technology that, we were told, would do away with the need for cars – and its descent to popular object of ridicule ("Make way for the Segway", 8 September). If the Segway finishes its days as spectacular a commercial disaster as its British predecessor, it will be because it failed to take into account its cheaper, faster, greener and greatly more efficient rival – the bicycle.

Yannick Read
Environmental Transport Association

CATEGORY - VEGETARIANISM

Dilemmas abound in the world of green.

And, sadly, nature is not always the best guide. I think I am safe in saying that we, humin beans, are essentially omnivores. And that includes eating meat. It's not strictly essential, but what we were designed for (OK, actually raw, but that can be covered in an appendix... geddit).

And, in the great climatic scheme of things, that is actually a bit of a design fault, if we are also to ignore our developing intellectually beyond the level of pragmatic and practical population balance measures.

There's no getting around the fact that, for a day's worth of sun, an acre of crops feed a lot more folk than an acre of crops feeding a cow... feeding some folk.

So... and accepting it is just another delaying tactic, vegetarianism is another potential mitigation in our march to destruction. Though it does I suppose leave around an awful lot of belching and windy Friesans to serve the cause of greenhouse reduction less well. So, just one last T-bone then?

Note: National Vegetarian Week in May

Links (evolving, natch, as advised or I stumble over new ones)

ARTICLES

Indy - Can you reduce your carbon footprint with a vegan diet?
Guardian - Credit crunch? The real crisis is global hunger. And if you care, eat less meat - I think this is the right place for it. A few other sacred cows ('scuse pun) get dragged in, too - biofuels, population, etc. Nice holiday ads though... somewhere to stay when writing about those on $2 a day I guess)
Indy - The Big Question: Is changing our diet the key to resolving the global food crisis?
Observer - It is time to become a vegetarian?
BBC Newsnight - Is it time to turn vegetarian? I argue with the 'facts' of the statement, not the ethics: In environmental discussions, Mother Nature, or doing what's 'natural' is often cited, in my view rightly, as a good thing. As one of her creations, it seems odd that our omnivorous design is now deemed by many as a flaw.

And the meat-banning advocacy might not serve too well some of the poster children of the climate change movement. Polar Bears or Tigers, for instance.

Whilst seeing the logic in part of what he says, I have to disagree with Mr. de Boer that this option is 'a solution'. At best it is a measure that buys some more time if other factors are not addressed.

Especially with greater affluence bringing currently already quite carnivorous cultures to the... er... table. In their billions. I kinda think we've been here before, too.

Guardian - UN says eat less meat to curb global warming - married to a Chinese with a great culinary repertoire, 'one meat free day' is not a stretch for us.

Guardian - Meathead mayor - I didn't post his piece because I thought he was being a bit silly and unnecessarily provocative (basically 'bacon breakfast, lunch and dinner 24/7, 365/365 - which is how to wind up the Guardian readers and ensure a high rating). QED.

Spiked - Why I’ve got a beef with going vegetarian

Guardian - NEW - Eating less meat won't save the planet

INFO

Veggievision - source of info

SUPPLIERS

One law for the [ ]*

*insert exceptions/interest groups that will not be you here.

I think this op-ed from Ch 4 sums it up best:

We’ve just heard that Greenpeace have won in their legal battle over their protest at the Kingsnorth power station in Kent. They’ve been found not guilty of causing criminal damage in their protest against the coal-fired station. Essentially the Greenpeace argument was that climbing up a chimney and daubing “Gordon” on it was not criminal damage, as it was lawfully right because it was needed to prevent the greater damage caused by the government’s energy policy and resulting carbon emissions. If you like, it was the old argument: you can bash down a door legally, to put out the fire on the other side of it. So where now? Can you go home tonight and chuck paint over the neighbour’s 4x4, to make a case against emissions? Anyone up for super-gluing the gates of the nearest coal-fired power station? I could go on whilst the lawyer is out of the room. But does it actually open any precedent at all? We take a look, hopefully with a lawyer. Precedent is doubtful. Environmentalists have already pulled something similar to this before, damaging GM crops, but beware of wider precedents.

So now, to add to when I go on holiday overseas I can claim I am raising awareness of climate change, I might try spinning some bit of local law-breaking as part of addressing a greater truth, possibly elsewhere. Worth a try, I guess. Always wondered what lay beyond those flood gates.

Guardian - Policy, not protesters, should be on trial

Times - Protesters cleared over damage to power plant

Spectator - Greenwashing A Jury - Not a good few days for jury decisions to some, but also not great to those who then decide they don't like the result. The system was used, and delivered its result. Seesm to me there was a failure by the prosecution to prove their case. Maybe not enough irony-free experts flown over from the USA to further help, um, 'awareness'?

Pitching envROI

Subsidised recycling is poor value for money

An interesting piece. Whilst there is little to disagree with in matters of fact, the slant taken become significant. Here an almost pure approach to the financial aspects in terms of return is considered. One can almost imagine that at the other extreme there might be one in the Guardian with uncritical green-tinted glasses advocating the 'environment', no matter what.

Such a shame, as surely between the enterprise and the social there is something more valid in terms of money possible, that can both serve the needs and interests of the planet and those upon it.

An attempt to encapsulate these economic AND environmental principles is attempted in the definition of enviROI*

It is hard to put subsidy and value for money together in the same sentence without accepting the 'value' of the social benefits that are gained.

Rationally, 'wasting' anything cannot be a good thing, and sticking raw materials back in the ground lacks a certain logic, unless one looks at it in a purely short term, time-dependent monentary manner. Surely this is evident by virtue of some landfills being considered for mining now? One has to wonder, much as one would putting one's 1960's mass-production sports coupe on blocks until now, what the 'value' might have been of setting aside useful materials in a segregated manner ready for economies re-embracing into the manufacturing system now. Nothing is infinite. So anything that does not tackle a problem and shunts it away is only a delaying tactic imposed on the future. Understandable, if not laudable if there is no imperative to even think about the problem, much less solutions, but very dubious if clear issues have been identified on the horizon.

I fear I must therefore take issue with the defence of landfill just on the basis of there being more places to stick stuff. It doesn't seem very nice, and it doesn't seem to make much sense.

Therefore my personal advocacy is much more energy (mental, that is) is devoted to more creative ways of reducing our waste in the first place, and making more of that which is, I accept, inevitably produced and discarded. Reduction, reuse...recycling. I fear the current cabal who should have/be addressing this for long enough - government, LAs, quangos (so many quangos), manufacturers, retailers, and even many media - have so far been WOEFUL, if not plain dishonest. At best we have bazzillions going on disjointed systems, little empires and epic comms budgets, all of which seem primarily designed to make it the poor public/consumer's problem.

I agree about the targets. I agree about the jobsworths. But also I agree about the green-blinkered groups, who see anything that is not consumerist as therefore automatically 'good' when, if I understand the debate correctly, the key issue now is Co2 emissions rather than stuff in the wrong place... or generating methane in an unmanaged way. Hence silly ban-wagons that make some feel good when in fact pumping more up in the air than was before.

Sadly, this debate already seems polarised. It's either landfill or recycling. I rather like to think there may be something in between that occupies a satisfactory middle ground and even, god forbid, ticks a few boxes, too.

What a waste of a country

I sometimes wonder if I am getting too jaded by the system.

In passing, I added a few blogs past a link to an ITV recycling expose with little comment as I was not terribly surprised. I have long known, and been disgusted by the fact that recycling collection targets are based on amounts that tick boxes rather than actual value of recyclate. So big fat bonuses and careers are forged on the acquisition of a spurious 'thing' that makes bureaucrats wet themselves but serve the environment little. And yet it happens so often, in so many places, I cease to bat an eye.

But then I happened to read a blog post from some others who, it is safe to say, care, and until this point had some faith in the system. I still care, a lot, but as to faith in the system...

A Rubbish Service TV programme on ITV1

Addendum - It may be viewed for a period here*

Their sense of anguish and frustration was... is frankly palpable. And little wonder.

With all we know. And all that is being said, and claimed, and claimed to be done, and spent, and even after the exact same thing being brought out by the BBC (remember the Grosvenor situation? Though the Fred Pearce book (reviewed here) does have an extra insight into some aspects) years ago, the general public gets shown this.

How on earth will any group cohesion be possible on a national level when we are exposed to fines and abuses in the name of green at one end, and such rampant disarray (being charitable) at the other?).

It seems to me it is only by letting the will, and good will of the people to blossom will anything sensible take shape. Almost all the pols, LAs, consultants, advisors, officers, research and myriad of other 'eco-posts' are but expensive, distracting, 'jobs for the boys' drains on actually doing what's right and proper for our kids' futures.

My only concern is that the main way I can try and effect change, through my vote, will be ineffective these days as I simply cannot pin down, and hence target those who are responsible and give them the career and financial kicking they deserve. And so the rumbling ship of.. in a state will simply plough on, regardless. What a waste of a country.

Newsnight -

Last night ITV ran an expose of the state of our national recycling policies and systems, whereby an OAP seems eligible to be sent to Elba for popping an extra cabbage leaf to their bin, yet the person in charge of such a policy at their LA has no clue where container loads of 'recycling' (note: the tonnages box-ticked are only on what it is (might be); nor whether it is any use to man nor beast) goes, but for sure will be ready first in line to get their bonus for an all round sterling job.

http://www.itv.com/News/tonight/episodes/Arubbishservice/default.html

I am minded of a BBC expose back in Dec 2005 that covered pretty much the same thing.

http://junkk.blogspot.com/2005/12/tiger-in-turkey-hut-more-like.html

What, if anything, has changed, bar the bonus structures on an index-linked basis, plus what's shaping up as a terrific 'guilty 'til proven still guilty' revenue-collection system?

Maybe when our convoy of governance has got back from its outing to trying to run the country again without more wheels falling off, maybe one of the succession of environment Ministers (past and present... maybe even Mr. Milliband?) might be invited to waffl... comment on how we have come so... er.. far.

I really don't see much point in all these stories if they are not followed up and the protagonists held to account.

* I have now watched the programme - first up the usual quango talking heads waffling and promising investigation and action. Heard that before? What amazes me is that this still goes on and those involved (inc. pols, LAs, etc) seem to think that they are immune from the consequences. But on such evidence, maybe they are right.

It is good that there are such programmes, but I have to wonder what the follow-up will be.. after the last one. But at least this time the point was made about the level of penalties we are being subjected to in the UK on a personal level, and maybe if enough of us get miffed enough at such rampant inequality and hypocrisy we may decide to get angry enough to react.

I did/do have to wonder how it came to be that the UK waste processor seemed to accept some highly contaminated waste quite stocially and simply passed it on as 'damaged goods'. Surely they should fire it straight back as rejected? Money talks, surely?

These highly paid government servants and fat cats cannot be allowed to weasel out of this based simply on a huge number of 'don't knows'. One agrees the public may feel 'let down', but suggests we continue recycling. That's all well and fine (note that word). But there are people accountable, and they should be held to it.

Green Halo

It's a new term I am playing with for things that seem to be fine in a 'why not?' way, but seem to have also been accorded a clunky bit of green in the process to , er, 'help'.

And this is a terrible example by being actually the exact reverse.

Driving instructors get green light from DSA to teach students 'eco-safety'

It's a bit of green with a clunky bit of 'why not?' attached.

Thing is, I am not sure it is serving the message of either too well by being so clunky.

I can get my head around driving safely, and being taught how to be even more so. I can also sort of get an eco-version, though much is plain common sense, but a few I have read about (Not here) might save a bit of gas but are certainly not helping safety at all.

But all in all, if I ever hear 'Eco-safety' like this, I'll ru... drive a mile... fast.

Good job I am not being asked to do another test... yet.

Times - Eco-safe driving: more lessons, more money - All becomes clear. And gives sensible green advocacy and even steeper slope to surmount... in 3rd, of course.

Newsnight - Post 3.

A lot is explained

Politicians need wisdom when chosing green regulation

An interesting discussion around the Two E's, plus a worthy link as well.

A small reminder

I thought this letter in the Indy today was well articulated:

Energy policy about to hit the iceberg

Your correspondents ("Bringing down the cost of solar panels", 4 September) are not just re-arranging the Titanic's deckchairs, they are busily hammering holes in her hull. Yes, you can make anything appear viable by offering subsidies, but artificial "feed-in" tariffs, renewables obligation certificates and support for biofuel producers merely transfer the economic costs to the taxpayer and the environmental costs to the planet.

Most renewables, particularly micro-generation, do not just leave users out of pocket; in many cases their production and distribution absorb more energy and emit more carbon than the units will ever pay back. By contrast, turning down the central heating or putting out some lights costs nothing and saves money on the next bill, not in 160 years.

We must recognise that reducing our energy consumption is essential, because all forms of fuel are running out, because we are increasingly dependent on foreign regimes for our supplies and because most energy use causes CO2 emissions. We must have an energy policy which includes sustainable sources such as underground coal gasification, geothermal energy and community-based combined heat and power. Unlike most renewables, these offer energy 365 days a year. Wind and solar have a place when they can be installed on an industrial scale at the point of use, but those who believe they will allow us to continue our squanderous lifestyle while saving the planet are recklessly deluded.

Thing is... are we really surprised?

Main parties 'reneging on green promises'

Well, we all know what a 'pol's promise' is owrth at best. Butthis could equally lurk in the 'Two E's" category as a reson if not excuse.

What's missing from this headline...

..is 'Probably Man-Worsened...', my preferred prefix.

Found after 300m years: rainforest fossils show how climate change could look

Mainly because we are looking some 299m years before the first Humvee.

A point not missed by some already or, I suspect to come, others.

Doesn't make things easy, does it?

PROF'S POSER - Where's an actuary when you need one?

The other day these bits of paper arrived.

At first I was going to bin them, but then I had a read, and as a consequence of that called up the sender.

You see, our washing machine is at last 10 years old. Still doing a sterling job, bar a few hiccups year on year that have been resolved.

Thing is, I don't recall ever seeing such an insurance before, so they must n=know what they are doing.

The deal is not cheap, coming in at well over £100 a year. But the up side is tempting. They either fix it if...when it dies, or give us a new one.

Now, my main aim is environmental (no, really) in that I like the notion of repair if at all possible (lord knows what the enviROI on a call-out is), but I was also wondering about the numbers.

Being that a new one is around £2-300, does it make any sense to take out such a policy at this stage?

Oh, what a tangled web...

Now I am the first to admit that this little spit 'n sawdsut operation is more than prone to the odd IT-boo-boo.

You don't want 'em, or like 'em, but they happen.

So it is always reassuring when someone oodles bigger cocks up.

Assuming they didn't mean to address me this way, of course.

How to get in the news: screw up a bit less

Or, 'Stats they way, uh-huh, I like it'.

I know it is good to big up positives and if it's local it has to be good, but you have to wonder what basis news rooms shape their stories. Mabye just a great press release?

Seems our very own Severn Trent water service is the most improved for complaints with some measure or other (I'd never heard of it before). I know this thanks to BBC Midlands Today (will try and get the link - er, good luck via the awful BBC search feature).

Great.

Thing is, as far as I could gather, this accolade is more a matter of the % they have improved from a rather dire level before. So, from god awful to just awful gets you in the media, it seems.

I wonder if there are any out there just doing well and no better than before, and how they feel?

I even had a category ready

This deserves its own gig. More so by being in the Guardian:

Elitist evangelists

I am hard-pressed to figure out what the £30k 'damage' was/is, but 'if you commit the crime, you do the time', etc, I guess.

However, this is one CiF I'll watch from the sidelines.

Telegraph - NEW - Climate change chicanery - The author is a major climate optimist, and hence all written should be viewed in this light but, if true, the point about the function of an expert witness in a legal trial is a good one, and I'd like that question on how two advocates came to be used in this role was allowed.

CATEGORY - TV SHOWS

Haven't created a category in a while. Here's a new one.

BBC

Earth: The Climate Wars - one down, 2 & 3 next Sunday and the one after

ITV

A Rubbish Service -

I might even get round to a re:view every so often. Mind you, I keep missing 'em! Most najors now have a week long follow-up window. Then... YouTube/iPod is your friend?

Where does what we recycle go to?

Of course our local authorities ensure that all recycled rubbish is accounted for and properly and usefully handled, don't they?

Well, not so, according to this from the Telegraph a few days ago.

200 authorities DO know exactly where recycled rubbish ends up.....
but, 135 are unable to confirm where recycled rubbish goes......
and 20 have no idea whatsoever where it goes to!!

I had cause to be briefly back at home when the recycling lorry made it's collection last week, and my eyebrows rose considerably higher as I watched the guys empty our carefully separated paper, glass and metal into, you've guessed it, one single mixed container! On top of this, now it seems that no-one can genuinely account for where it goes too!

Its beginning to make me wonder whether the weekly rubbish sort out is worth the effort.

Addendum (JM) -
Telegraph - Do we waste too much?
Telegraph - The European Union's recycling regulations are a failure

ITV - A Rubbish Service - Missed it, but really there are too many these days. Sounds like more of the same. Worth doing, but the lack of change in the face of such exposes is telling.