You are who you eat

Meet Daisy the cow – global climate’s enemy number one.

"To the person who gets this far to read this (if it is not moderated)... good Sunday morning! It's glorious here in Ross. Let's enjoy such weather while we can.

The ICCP report came out 2 days ago. I have just conducted an interesting (well, to me), analysis of coverage since:

http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/02/10-years-and-human-race-is-screwed-but.html

On the day in question, Newsnight devoted itself to the issue. There was Ms. Watts' (great name, all things considered) slot, with Mr. Milliband 'talking' about the need for 'action'. No change there, then.

And then, to round up on the day we are told we are 10 years from catastrophe, we have a slot on... cow farts (tee -hee). And the conclusion is, well, 'it's not really for me so back to the burgers.'

What next? 'Actually those low energy bulbs are expensive, don't last as long and are dimmer, so bring back the 100W pearlies!!' (Justin - Where did you get the low-energy LED halogen-effect spotlights in your kitchen, by the by?).

Anyway as we're on meat, and turkey (looks like Dan was spared a fate worse than sneezing to death) is off the menu (if not all the front pages) for a while I guess, let's get onto what apparently really matters at this juncture in our planet's survival.

A lot of folk seem to think man is at odds with nature, in the same way as a lion defending his territory to the death is ok, but my owning property 'is theft'.

Well, without getting too theological, we kinda stemmed from the same design-shop, and it's looking like we're pretty flawed.

We've done what (forgive the pun) comes naturally for a while now, and there's quite a lot of us. No more space to stand on and grow stuff, but we're still populating away, whilst merrily turning the growing bits into sources of fuel for our dear leader to gad about on the lecture circuit.

Speaking of what's not practical, Justin's reversion is not so surprising, because another aspect to the design flaw is that 'we' (even those who don't by choice) are omnivores. Not a mandatory by diet, but certainly a powerful force by programming (as is making things, trading them, boldly going... etc).

Trouble is, in addition to being told by 2500 of the world's finest (and the media, if only until yesterday), that we're screwed in 10 years if we go on as we are, I'm not seeing any great sense of cutting back on the LCD purchases, Vista upgrades, trips to study the impact of GW on whales (what used to be called a 'holiday' for the public, or a 'jolly' for the green elite).. or the filet mignon.

Which may be a bit of a problem soon, as the guys with the cows fight it out for space with the guys growing biofuels. I'm guessing bread will be history by then.

So, to this carnivore at least, as we're not doing anything yet about population, and the lobbyist power plus short-term political survival instincts (at least until the gold-plated, index-linked retirement is over) has meant that the commercial/governmental fudge on all things manufacturing and travel will continue, we better sort those dastardly bovines out right now. At least to buy some more time to fudge a bit longer.

As an ex-scientist, the numbers seem clear. If we are talking about nutritional ROI on our available land, we should all go veggie (I'm never to clear on the 'arian/egan' thing - one seems doable, the other a good way to fit into those size 0's) asap. It's just what is eventually all that will be sustainable. And even then it is just another delaying measure if other issues are not addressed. Though Avian flu may end up as a nifty, natural, Malthusian correction. Temporarily.

But as we'll doubtless conquer that (assuming it hasn't been created to sort out a few of the other problems by guys like Hugo Drax - have fun googling that. If it's true can I have the antivirus for sussing it out, please?), I have only two words for you, and as a guy who just turned 50 my hand shakes as I write them: Soylent Green."

10 years and the human race is screwed. But first, Kylie has been dumped!

OK. Here's Saturday (that I could track in terms of influential major media information and commentary):

BBC - How Green is my Auntie?
Times - New fears on climate raise heat on leaders
Times - Damning report seeks to end debate over global warming
Times - Bush takes his place on the bandwagon
BBC Newsnight (which seems to have closed already as they didn't add my comment) - How green should we be?
Telegraph - Scientists: Only man can stop climate disaster
Telegraph - The changing face of the planet
Guardian (nice to see a power co. will stick a tree in for you) - Worse than we thought
Guardian CiF - A call to arms on climate change
Guardian CiF - An unforgivable truth
Indy - Global warming: the final warning
BBC - Miliband in climate 'action' call
BBC - Humans blamed for climate change

BBC Newsnight - See if they add my comment

And here's today:

Telegraph (wonder if they'll post my comment)- Carbon omissions
Telegraph - IPCC puts it bluntly on global warming
Telegraph - The next few years are critical in the fight for the climate
Times - The greening of business
Indy (this is so sweet) - Green: They are. Are you?
Indy - Chirac leads calls for new UN body to save the environment
Indy (always worth repeating, so make that a final, final..) - Global warming: the final warning
Observer - We cannot let the Kyoto debacle happen again

No tabloids that I can see. I doubt Richard and Judy got too excited (esp. with Kylie 'n all). BBC Breakfast has moved on. Andrew Marr didn't mention it in his preamble earlier (though I have yet to watch). It certainly has moved off the front pages.

Politically, it seems saving personal skins (more immediately, missing the point that all skins could be at risk pretty soon) may be higher on most agendas, though it looks like one Minister was called upon to say something. Which he did. I believe the 'word' is 'action'. Moving quickly on...

Oh, and case you're really worried, here's Kylie.

Didn't take the few who did pay attention long to lose interest, did it?

I think I'll just get back to Junkk.com duties now.

However, looking at Supermarkets discover shoppers hate excess packaging as waste campaign gathers force whilst I still can't get a peep out of said supermarkets, relevant government bodies or much support from the media for our free, non taxpayer-funded, reuse website still rankles.

But first, the (more ratings driven?) news

We cannot let the Kyoto debacle happen again

Well... golly.

Shame it doesn't seem to warrant the same front page attention as, say, bird flu, which the nice virologist on Breakfast TV says is 'nothing to worry about' (though a global pandemic would be a fairly effective Malthusian correction by Mother Nature to what's probably the biggest issue facing us).

Errors of...?

Carbon omissions

'Well... golly.

"...the situation we face is potentially extremely serious" That would be serious planet-wide.

Yet, speaking of omissions, it doesn't seem to warrant the same front page attention as, say, bird flu, which the nice virologist on Breakfast TV says is 'nothing to worry about' (though a global pandemic would be a fairly effective Malthusian correction by Mother Nature to what's probably the biggest issue facing us).'

Navel Re:view

And so it rumbles on: How green should we be?

"I always have trouble with these blogs because there are the questions asked in the headline. Then those asked in the body. And then those answered and asked in post replies that can be arriving in a moderated scenario out of sequence, if at all (system permitting)

So on the day of the ICCP report, in answer to the headline at the top, I’d say ‘as green as you can be, realistically!’.

That last word immediately sets up a whole can of worms. What is realistically? You are a public broadcaster. How do you best serve the public. With information and facts? But whose? Offer both sides and if you err on a view then you can be accused of bias.

And then there is the sheer volume of fact AND opinion, multiplied by blogs. I have almost given up trying to cope with all just on the Newsnight one alone about this issue, much less the BBC and then on to the major media. My blog (accessed via my site above) has tried to list all the competing majors, with more to be added.

And it can all get sidelined by trivia.. if with
some validity. Jeremy makes a pretty gutsy stand, with fair points, and then we have by way of response that he may have not switched his monitor off, so who’s he to talk? Helpful?

I’d agree with the poster who is a tad surprised that you don’t feel its your job to save the planet you are standing on.

Just make sure that if you do it, you do it for the right reasons and in the right ways..

That’s an even bigger can of worms I’m debating with some sincere, smart cookies on my site now.

I hope I’ve offered enough to fulfill your needs here for now."

So little rare. So little well done.

Another reply to another featured link: Science forward, Bush backward

"I can comment little on the ICCP report, etc

Maybe tomorrow we'll avert it. Today we'll get parents heated up about kids getting heated up about heating up. If there is more debate tomorrow I shall return perhaps better informed but I doubt with some forming views much altered about the issue, and how the various protagonists (gov, med, interest/activist groups and biz) have, are and will treat it. Even in blogs. Who knows what lobbyist, PR or press officer lurks behind a "Clarkson for PM' or 'Green of Bristol moniker'.

...etc.

At least the trains will run on time. If there are any.

One climate post was this: What the world needs now is a green fascist

I had to write:

"Dear Mr. Carr,

I have been meaning to write before, most recently on a good commentary you passed on joined up government, and the media’s role in reporting it – The rising tide of generalisation.

This one has at last moved me to get finger to keyboard in good order.

I do hope what you meant was a 'good authoritarian'. While he skirted pretty close, having lived in Singapore for several years Lee Kwan Yew 'got things done' under that mantle, and got away with few applying the fascist accusation either internally of externally. Indeed the PAP seems to sail along, fairly democratically, under his watchful eye still.

Which is more than I sense happening here (as in this country): http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/02/this-is-very-likely-one-of-more.html

As you arch an eyebrow at Ms. May's suggestion, so I have, do and will ask how much will be consumed (if not wasted) throwing good money into the globally warming inferno, and to what effect.

I am currently writing to Mr. Miliband and his many other co-green ministers to ask why one of his vastly funded enviro-quangos a) never helped me when it could and should, and b) now seems to be competing with me, using my business plan and taking 'sponsorship' (ie: ad money) to do so, when they originally said they couldn't help me because I was commercial (whilst being free to all, at the same time as funding Tesco and Heinz, when the last time I looked a tin of beans wasn't).

This is one social entrepreneur who is fearing for his sanity, along with his kids' and their kids' chances."

This is very likely one of the more important posts you can read here...

..to date.

For a start, I am going to say little, because not only have I not read the ICC report yet (if ever, at least in its entirety), I have not thoroughly read all these reviews. So maybe an even more important post is yet to come.

For now... enjoy (or not, as the case may be - I'm certainly not looking forward to all I have to wade through this weekend):





BBC - Humans blamed for climate change
Guardian CiF - Science forward, Bush backward
Guardian - Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study
Indy - What the World needs now is a green fascist
Indy - Alan Johnson: Children must think differently
Indy - Ten years left to avert catastrophe
Indy - All pupils to be given lessons in climate change
Reuters - U.N. panel says global warming man-made
New Scientist - Blame for global warming placed firmly on humankind
DEFRA - Debate on climate change science is over - international political agreement now urgently needed/Climate change film distributed to all secondary schools
Telegraph - Man's guilt for global warming clear

I have chosen as the visual today's Indy cover (I would have liked to have used for its awesome irony the pop-up ad I got of a Land Rover on top the world, but didn't hit page capture before it disappeared). I do so because I note no other has taken this as the lead, and indeed nor has the Indy, which is odd when we have a headline on offer that reads Ten years left to avert catastrophe

Maybe tomorrow we'll avert it. Today we'll get parents heated up about kids getting heated up about heating up.

I have to say that if I was a minister of indeed sub-editor, as a parent as well I'd be more inclined to go the route of 'We must help kids get informed and inspired in the best ways to engage with the challenges of CC/GW'. As it reads what I see smacks of nanny and big brother or, god forbid, another total waste of funds on a 'campaign' by target-hitters whose only knowledge of pushing kids' buttons is by fining 12 year olds for putting the wrong type of paper in the bin.

I'd go for fun, education and re:ward, with such as Junkk.com. What are the chances of that? Or there is support from well-known kids' reads such as broadsheets like the Indy, who still can't bring themselves to mention us (much less get in touch in reply to our outreach) in their campaign on packaging.

You get the picture and [fill in dis-organisational gov, media and biz entities here] ... you deserve.

Bon. Mais.. cinq minutes!

I wrote about public building illumination recently, so this caught my eye:

Eiffel Tower turns light off to signal climate risk

I know there's safety and all, but what is the symbolic message here? And is there a better one? Off during the week? Hour earlier? On hour later? Low energy bulbs? Make it a thing to come to see once a year?

Son mais pas d'illumiere.

Charity begins, at 17.5% of spend

At least it used to when I ran my agency, unless you did a deal and waived the media commission on top of doing the creative and production for free (which we did, but usually on the understanding we could really go for it with the concept).

Save the Children overhauls marketing

This is a story in a specialist publication about a specialised industry, but the numbers and the players (and numbers of players) makes me queasy at what actually may be going on here.

I know it should be as simple as getting money from a donor to a worthy recipient, but no longer can be. And I know 'marketing' is a legitimate part of making that match. But... how many people are feeding off the money before it even arrives?

Mad - On the plus side (not sure about the media)

Let the (blame) games begin!

I don't play much sport. I watch even less. Especially now that the whole thing has become a business on one side and I can appreciate the abilities of most sportsperson no more than the money spent on training and success at finding new, legal 'aids'.

However, I am now a (poor, in every sense) student of cause funding, and I do not like what I read here: Good causes miss out as Olympics soaks up half a billion in Lotto funds

As I bang on about specious ROIs being used, even trumpeted in the environmental world, I should not be surprised that the small matter of setting a budget and sticking to it seems to have been neglected.

A lot of Pols these days (have to) start of their interviews with 'I'm not in the business of blaming anyone'. Well, I'm afraid I think we need to get back to this a lot more. Every inefficient, egotistical and especially corrupt individual who is engaged in a project and cocks up, especially because of self-interest, should be named, shamed, fired and not compensated.

Can we now move on? Clearly.

This Man's guilt for global warming clear seems pretty, er, clear.

Though I would wish that headlines and facts tallied more closely, to avoid Achilles Heels that others can exploit:

Scientists are now overwhelmingly confident...

The exact phrasing of the report... was still being negotiated by scientists.

The best estimate is that...

This is expected to mean...

If it is as alarming as experts predicted...

'Scientists' or 'experts' are pretty catch-all terms, and I think need to be put in context much more clearly and up-front to establish credibility.

And those disclaimer terms seem to be the work of a person trying to steal a march. Wait until you know, and then state it loud... and clear

Finally, without sounding like a denier, I am not sure if Man's guilt for causing GW in totality is proven, but there seems a clear case for us making it lots worse and hence needing to do something about making it better. Again, I hope creating an opening for such semantics will not in turn lead to more pointless debate.

Some get more airtime than others...

...which, in a media-driven age, means they end up more equal.

I had to pitch in to this: No Special Treatment

'This seems a game with no winners, except maybe those who create conflict and those who feed on it.

I think all parties playing it, especially some press, needs to assess the creation, acceptance and status accorded 'community leaders'.

Are they elected? If not, who says they speak for anyone other than themselves and their own agendas? Interviews with these guys (and gals) seem at best lazy and at worst ratings-driven (to extremes) reporting. And it’s frustrating to be fed a politician or ‘leader’ claiming to speak for the majority, when the only credible evidence of any frequent contact they do have is with a news channel researcher’s speed dial.

I watched one such 'representative' yesterday given national news coverage to demand, it seemed, that he be involved in the police investigative process from the outset.

If granted, can I please sit in on meetings where speed cameras get sited in my area?'

If only because it happens so often in the environmental debate. 'The people of the UK want..' gets bandied about by both sides, when I suspect (how can I do any more without asking 60M people?) most wish they'd all shut up and go away and leave it to those who are trying to do something to just get on and help make things better.

When blogging goes bad

Blogs can be great. But the system can frustrate both poster and readers, as highlighted by this from a Newsnight post I took part in (and couldn't resist answering):

Ref: vikingar

Or... it might be the system is not working too well.

Calm down, dear, it's only a cock-up.

Usually after posting you get an immediate return to the board with an acknowledgement. These days 2 out 3 I have tried (I used to and still do make the same mistake) either result in half an hour of the spinning pizza of death (I have a Mac - maybe the cause?) and/or eventually a failure sign.

So you retry later. Well, YOU don't, but some of us do because we don't know if it has been received or not. It has and is happening all over the board.

That said...

As it is moderated one wonders why the moderator can't just lop out the duplicates?

And I agree that of all major media I appreciate most the immediacy, reassurance and openness of the Guardian system. Though I have seen a few folk complain they have been removed with no good reason (must take something pretty egregious). The Telegraph is very good - or bad, depending on your view - at moderating out stuff it doesn't fancy, which in a free press is editing that can rather make one doubt their commitment to balanced debate. Despite the BBC’s rather unique status this one is pretty good, but again I have seen folk complain they are not being heard and can only wonder why. Maybe that's why Duncan editted down to repost later?

ps: I'm a MORON - that's Middle Of the Road, Outside Nomenclature – and proud of it. I find political labels (or any mild pejorative, such as 'denier' or 'mentalist' in the enviro debate) to be often inaccurate and lead to further name-calling. A view is a view and you can span the political spectrum without slavishly adhering to one doctrine.

We're sincerely flattered #2

Dave of Solarventi has nagged, and when he nags I have to move quicksmart.
So...

"This one is a definite must ... …. for inclusion on www.junkk.com – crisp bags as CD covers!"

He is, of course, right. It's nifty.

And I have suggested he 'homage' it on our Suggest page.

And readers are welcome to peruse our Ideas pages for something to send in, as nothing with Junkk's or my name on it will get a showing.

For instance, in a similar vein that I use the liner from cereal packets as lunch bags for the boys, often sealing them with one of those pocket heater gizmos.

Time to don my Batman outfit

First Tesco Tel; now this. Who do I have to nobble to get us noticed?

Today in the mail was this book. It's a nice little selection of eco-websites in the UK, and while we know almost all of them (and a few more besides) it's a 'sure, why not?'.

Thing is, we're not in it. Not under the Re's or even packaging. And at last I am seeing how it can be hard as a journalist to remain truly objective. Rest assured, I must be:)

The next slot in the newsletter is taken, but I will review it, as that is what I presume it was sent to us for (unless it was a very expensive way to rub our noses in it). And I will also note that its publishers are Eden Project, who we drove to visit a few years ago to see how we could help each other. Sadly, they (or at least their PR folk) were too busy saving the planet to want to deal any further with us, having dragged us to Cornwall to see them.

It can all... test... you at times.

OK, tell me how to get past his genius gatekeepers

Terry Leahy: Don't blame us: we can't get rid of all packaging

"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."

I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...

I've just written to the Indy's Editor:

Dear Sir,

"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."

I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years to get through. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...

Can you help us get past the pen-pushing, bean-counting, career and hence profit-obsessed minions inbetween initiatives like ours and Sirs Terry and Michael, etc and their new-found green commitments. Or indeed Ministers like Miliband, Bradshaw, etc, as they keep churning out more 3rd sector, we must engage with social entrepreneur guff?

Our site is free. It gets good editorial. The public likes it. It makes the environment fun. And it needn't cost anyone (biz, gov or tax/ratepayer) a penny. In fact, by finding ways to reuse packs and packaging it may even add to the marketing, PR and CSR stories of these businesses in a very non-greenwash manner.

When are people going to stop talking long enough to listen to others outside their elite circles who may have complementary solutions on offer.

If you can help I'd be grateful.

BBC - Ask Tel

Enough already.

I've had to write to Newswatch.

"Though there is an objective news aspect, I think we can agree that BBC Breakfast also serves a few agendas, some worthy and some self serving, but certainly including a social one.

On the day Jeremy Paxman publishes a critique of 'mixed messages' in the Times, I wonder how the BBC reconciles placing a slot advocating, indeed selling, space tourism (RyanTrek?) next to one with a celeb selling the latest planet saving effort.

While a why not/better than nothing, this seemed more of an ad for Toyota's Prius, inaccurately stated as the solution to all car-related eco-issues (it is not). And the fact that he was gushing next to Mr. Blair, whose record on eco-cosistency is chequered at best was laughable."

Are you Hello! or a informative news source with decent analysis?"

OH. MY. GOD!

I just watched the piece on BBC Breakfast TV with the bouffant and the blonde gushing over the latest Celeb, Josh Hartnett, who with many other celebs met Mr. Blair to discuss green issues.

Plus side. There is another website to 'make a difference': globalsomething (oddly the URL not mentioned).

Down side. What was mentioned, twice, was that you should buy a Toyota Prius to save the planet. I don't think so.

I doubt they'll publish this either: "One appreciates Josh's sincerity, but Mr. Blair as a role model? And rather than being an complete ad for Toyota Prius (twice), it may be worth pointing out that it may not be the best car to save the planet in certain non-urban circumstances."

ADDENDUM:

I have added several of these posts to Newsnight's blog. Annoyingly they have taken them selectively and /or out of sequence. Here's my latest.

After the piece selling a contest for space tourism, we now have on TV this morning Hollywood star Josh Hartnett, who with many other celebs met Mr. Blair to discuss green issues... as above.

In addition to my comment on the irony of these two items being back-to-back, on top of Jeremy's comments in the Times today, I doubt they'll publish this either: "One appreciates Josh's sincerity.. as above"

There's doing. There's seen to be doing. And there's simply doing what's right and works.

It would be good if the major media could help us decide on the basis of objective information and not ratings-driven hype.

BBC - Josh goes globally cool
Express - Concert

Oh, the irony..

No sooner do I note the piece in the last blog, inspired by a piece in the Times, look what I came across a bit further on...

Praise for bubblewrap could get you into space

I'll pass for now the issue of consistency on the Times' part (though they will argue they are only here to pass on the news), but.... bubblewrap!!! There are a lot of other much better ways to pack things that don't use plastic, guys!