CARBON OFFSET - IS THIS A MARKETING PLOY RIPE FOR DISCREDIT?
'..got me thinking...'
You and us, all, mate!
For a start, I first of all defy anyone to come up with a clear, coherent notion of what these 'carbon' prefixed notions (offset, neutral, footprint..) actually mean, much less as tangible, trustworthy measures of positive enviROI when put into 'practice'.
It's such a pity. I am no great fan of targets, but in the great scheme of things some measures of what is happening are needed to get a handle on what is going on... at the very least to figure out what may or may not be helping.
But it has all become such cowboy territory, pretty much the whole lot has become totally tarnished, especially in the key area of consumer awareness. And in so doing has dragged some potentially worthy areas down with it all.
I try and stay objective, and informed. But thanks to all that has gone down so far I find it hard to find greet any initiative/message that has 'carbon' in it, and especially when in marketing materials, with anything but an already well-cranked eyebrow.
It simply conjures up visions of those silly bankers in some Andalusian retreat trying to brainstorm up the next superficial spin, to cover up rather than actually addressing the real issue.
The environment can be a great opportunity to see gold in green, but only if the mindset goes from trying to address it as a 'problem' to be 'dealt' with. Or purely exploit short term.
It can indeed be a great opportunity, but only as part of an overall ethical whole, and not just to score a quick bit of PR or slogan.
There is a crying need for some measure, including gold-standard, peer-reviewed provenance chains, that the individual can trust, to help them arrive at an informed decision (and not just a sop) in their purchasing patterns.
But on past and present evidence, from international governance to national commerce or even media involvement, I am not holding my breath (well, we all might have to soon, but that's another story).
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
What a hummer!
This from WhatCar had me smiling somewhat.
Seems that Hummer have made huge inroads into improving the efficiency of their engine for the Hummer H2 (Yours for only £48,995!!).
The new engine has reduced CO2 emissions 20%, some 100g/km. Sounds great, doesn't it? But the new engine still emits a stonking 412g/km!! Oh, and its fuel economy has improved from 13.2 mpg to 16.2 mpg.
Still, I reckon it demonstrates that even the really 'dirty' players in the auto market are starting to take note that humanity needs to do something about reducing carbon emissions.
Seems that Hummer have made huge inroads into improving the efficiency of their engine for the Hummer H2 (Yours for only £48,995!!).
The new engine has reduced CO2 emissions 20%, some 100g/km. Sounds great, doesn't it? But the new engine still emits a stonking 412g/km!! Oh, and its fuel economy has improved from 13.2 mpg to 16.2 mpg.
Still, I reckon it demonstrates that even the really 'dirty' players in the auto market are starting to take note that humanity needs to do something about reducing carbon emissions.
NEWS/Commercial PR - And the next logical step is... reuse!
What's not to like about Lush? Even the name gives you a warm fuzzy glow. Well, now their packaging can make that feeling radiate from within even more... by becoming made from recycled plastics.PR as received, with the usual edits for space:
LUSH COSMETICS SWITCH TO 100% RECYCLED BOTTLES AND POTS
Brand Lush have launched 100% post-consumer recycled bottles and pots. They know that the best kind of packaging is no packaging at all, but recognise that some packaging is necessary, for liquid products such as shower gels and moisturisers, for example. This initiative means that they save about 115 tonnes of CO2, and are also saving nearly 90 tonnes of virgin plastic or 900 barrels of oil each year. The plastic in the bottles and pots can also be recycled again, and customers are encouraged to reuse* or recycle themselves, or to bring clean pots back (to encourage customers to do this Lush are offering a free fresh face mask for every 5 empty pots brought back to the store).
*Top start. But another reason we're running this feature is that we're hoping to persuade them to also upload their range details, as have the likes of those nice folks at ecover, onto the Junkk.com site to see what can be made of them afterwards as well! Which kind of works for all in the mix... consumer, brand... and planet:)
A voice in the wilderness?
Like I can get this lot to change their minds: Striking a balance on climate warnings
Navel-gazing is, one has to concede, hard to resist. And for some it can be profitable. While there's no doubt that some self-analysis can be worthwhile, if not downright necessary.
This piece raises some key points about the mindset of what, I rather suspect, is a vocal minority, and generally from the extremes of the (Probably man-worsened, negative impact - my preferred prefix) climate change 'debate'. And it is a fair complement to another, raised recently on these pages, which sadly was closed for comment before any could be made:
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2008/04/ears-of-babes.html
(now I have.. a cheeky fix, sorry)
I prefer not to get into these endless 'tis/t'isn't happening' matches as they seem, frankly, unwinnable exercises in going nowhere... if loudly and painfully.
And with the vast pressures of environmental issues having to be weighed against the equally potent influences of economic factors on a finite living space with increasing population, I have nothing but sympathy with those in power sincerely (important distinction) trying to understand where 'we' are, where 'we' are going, need to go and hence make some well tricky decisions whilst keeping their jobs.
But as a matter of principle, in motivating more than those who just like to tick a box or score a debating point, I'd simply like to advocate that those who truly do care about the future, and would like to try and influence our progress into it (I was going to add 'for the better', but that opens new cans of worms) spend a wee bit more time on encouraging the positives. And certainly a lot less blowing up, and blowing up over the all too frequent nags, nannies, bans, woes, fines, guilt trips and other less than inspiring or motivating methods that are mostly being used to such 'great' effect (not) in getting the majority of the public as individuals to try a bit harder to change their collective lifestyles.
Seek end-benefit-driven, reward/incentive-based actions, make them work and share their successes. And people may well get on board. Seems to work with most advertising in our consumer-driven systems.
Endless doom and gloom is not the best motivator. Which is why life assurers don't sell policies based on 'You're gonna die!' as the primary message, no matter how accurate and to the point it may be.
But sadly, 'Good News' is accepted as a tough sell in the media world. Maybe time to rise to the challenge of making it work... and profitably?
Yes, the title does say 'striking a balance', which seems to accept that the near total commitment to 'we're all doooomed' is not working, but I fear the advocacy to seeking a new way of persuasion is too little... hopefully not too late.
I just want to achieve a result. Don't care too much how it's done, so long as it is done well, for the right reasons... and quick.
Navel-gazing is, one has to concede, hard to resist. And for some it can be profitable. While there's no doubt that some self-analysis can be worthwhile, if not downright necessary.
This piece raises some key points about the mindset of what, I rather suspect, is a vocal minority, and generally from the extremes of the (Probably man-worsened, negative impact - my preferred prefix) climate change 'debate'. And it is a fair complement to another, raised recently on these pages, which sadly was closed for comment before any could be made:
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2008/04/ears-of-babes.html
(now I have.. a cheeky fix, sorry)
I prefer not to get into these endless 'tis/t'isn't happening' matches as they seem, frankly, unwinnable exercises in going nowhere... if loudly and painfully.
And with the vast pressures of environmental issues having to be weighed against the equally potent influences of economic factors on a finite living space with increasing population, I have nothing but sympathy with those in power sincerely (important distinction) trying to understand where 'we' are, where 'we' are going, need to go and hence make some well tricky decisions whilst keeping their jobs.
But as a matter of principle, in motivating more than those who just like to tick a box or score a debating point, I'd simply like to advocate that those who truly do care about the future, and would like to try and influence our progress into it (I was going to add 'for the better', but that opens new cans of worms) spend a wee bit more time on encouraging the positives. And certainly a lot less blowing up, and blowing up over the all too frequent nags, nannies, bans, woes, fines, guilt trips and other less than inspiring or motivating methods that are mostly being used to such 'great' effect (not) in getting the majority of the public as individuals to try a bit harder to change their collective lifestyles.
Seek end-benefit-driven, reward/incentive-based actions, make them work and share their successes. And people may well get on board. Seems to work with most advertising in our consumer-driven systems.
Endless doom and gloom is not the best motivator. Which is why life assurers don't sell policies based on 'You're gonna die!' as the primary message, no matter how accurate and to the point it may be.
But sadly, 'Good News' is accepted as a tough sell in the media world. Maybe time to rise to the challenge of making it work... and profitably?
Yes, the title does say 'striking a balance', which seems to accept that the near total commitment to 'we're all doooomed' is not working, but I fear the advocacy to seeking a new way of persuasion is too little... hopefully not too late.
I just want to achieve a result. Don't care too much how it's done, so long as it is done well, for the right reasons... and quick.
CATEGORY - COMPETITION - Post-it/Win a Smart Car
Now, these are without doubt 'commercial', but as they are enviro-related (with, usually, a 'green' prize) I figure they are a 'worth-sharing, 'why not?'. As advised:
WHEN: Now.. 'til the 29th of April
WHAT: Buy it. Plant it. Win it.
WHAT... MORE?: Via the URL
HOW MUCH: Well, you do need to buy some Post-its
URL: http://www.3m.com/intl/uk/GetSmart/index.html?WT.mc_id=www.post-it.co.uk/getsmart
COMMENTS: I have some views on whacking a fir in the firmament at the first offsetting opportunity, so make sure you think it's kosher..
AND NOW, AN APOLOGY...
I just got this:
'Unfortunately the survey was posted on several promotional websites without our permission, resulting in a very high number of unwanted survey responses which we are unable to separate from valid responses received from our selected addressees.
We have therefore had to abort the last survey and discard the information but we are still keen to receive your views and kindly ask you to complete the survey again.'
Well, guys, good luck with that. I get a bazillion emails a day, and this one struck a chord as a not bad freebie. I'm sorry if I passed on what I got as a mass email 'without permission', but frankly didn't think I needed any, and didn't see any advice on restrictions to entry or broadcast. However, my apology is to all I shared this with who it seems, like me, pretty much wasted their time on a bit of marketing that was not exactly well thought through, or at least explained. I wonder if it will pop up in the ASA adjudications.
WHEN: Now.. 'til the 29th of April
WHAT: Buy it. Plant it. Win it.
WHAT... MORE?: Via the URL
HOW MUCH: Well, you do need to buy some Post-its
URL: http://www.3m.com/intl/uk/GetSmart/index.html?WT.mc_id=www.post-it.co.uk/getsmart
COMMENTS: I have some views on whacking a fir in the firmament at the first offsetting opportunity, so make sure you think it's kosher..
AND NOW, AN APOLOGY...
I just got this:
'Unfortunately the survey was posted on several promotional websites without our permission, resulting in a very high number of unwanted survey responses which we are unable to separate from valid responses received from our selected addressees.
We have therefore had to abort the last survey and discard the information but we are still keen to receive your views and kindly ask you to complete the survey again.'
Well, guys, good luck with that. I get a bazillion emails a day, and this one struck a chord as a not bad freebie. I'm sorry if I passed on what I got as a mass email 'without permission', but frankly didn't think I needed any, and didn't see any advice on restrictions to entry or broadcast. However, my apology is to all I shared this with who it seems, like me, pretty much wasted their time on a bit of marketing that was not exactly well thought through, or at least explained. I wonder if it will pop up in the ASA adjudications.
Monday, April 07, 2008
CATEGORY - BOX-TICKING
Had to be kicked off, for all the good it will do...
Guardian - Ticking the boxes
I think we need funding to do a study into all the funding for studies into the sheer waste of time, money and space that is represented by the exponentially-growing box-ticking industry and those who gravitate into it with agendas above and beyond simply making sure what is happening is happening for good reasons and a decent ROI to those paying. It might go a long way to explaining how and why a pot of money is a) denuded on self-serving empires before any is allocated and b) what's left usually gets to go to some very odd places indeed.
Guardian - Ticking the boxes
I think we need funding to do a study into all the funding for studies into the sheer waste of time, money and space that is represented by the exponentially-growing box-ticking industry and those who gravitate into it with agendas above and beyond simply making sure what is happening is happening for good reasons and a decent ROI to those paying. It might go a long way to explaining how and why a pot of money is a) denuded on self-serving empires before any is allocated and b) what's left usually gets to go to some very odd places indeed.
Ears of babes
It's one of those odd 'cock-up... or something more significant?' moments when dealing with our 'major' media and their 'free' blogs.
How do you tell your children about climate change?
A thoughtful piece, which I thought deserved a thoughtful answer.
However, for some reason, comments were/are 'closed' almost as soon as it went up. I don't really pretend to understand the technical reasons, but as a policy it's hard to think why. By my way of thinking, once up stuff should stay up, and can be added to ad infinitum thereafter. This message, on such an innocuous piece, seems downright weird.
Anyway, as the question was posed I felt an answer was/is appropriate, if for no other audience than myself... or you if you are still reading.
The word honesty is used in the piece, and I think that is core. I am luckier than the author in that I do not 'know' as much as she obviously does, so when it comes to consequences I might be less prone to kick off by trying to terrify them.
Thing is, they are getting bombarded from all quarters, and as one of their life guides, along with the missus I do see the need to be there to help wherever possible; a bit of context here, an amplification there... and even the odd 'well, do you believe everything everyone says no matter what?'.
I'm not too sure what they are getting served up as part of the curriculum at school, but thought being shown 'The Inconvenient Truth', even with a side order booklet of 'what it should mean is..' was not the best I'd have hoped for. Especially as many teachers might not be at the cutting edge of knowledge on the issue which, as one who is middling at best is, if we're honest... 'we don't know, but best to get our heads around it now as it might well be very important, though not as important as getting re-elected, generating funds or boosting ratings'.
I certainly was not giving 'em green books at age six, especially any that try to justify their cover price and (often very worthy) contents with a bit of preamble as to why all this stuff might be best to get on board with... NOW!!!!!
There's also a slight danger they might buy too much into the token Twee-Green notions of 'more and more cars on the roads. Maybe too many planes too. Maybe trains as well, but only a little bit' but, as noted, that does allow one to segue into the notion that maybe it's more '...because we had too many lights on too'. After 11 years I am still switching off after them mind.
Thing is, reading such as the Guardian and books like this made/makes me feel really worried, too. And yes, I still feel miserable thinking about it now. Maybe I should, but it's no way to live life to the max. Trust me. I am often in a blue funk bunker mode just trying to figure out what to do, because doing causes stuff, and stuff causes...
So I sure as hell will be doing all I can to ensure my kids learn to live theirs fully whilst also having as good a grounding as I can give them to use only what they need, and to waste as little as possible. In as positive, rewarding and entertaining a way as I can concoct.
Too late for me, but I don't think worry and misery are the best motivators around.
How do you tell your children about climate change?
A thoughtful piece, which I thought deserved a thoughtful answer.
However, for some reason, comments were/are 'closed' almost as soon as it went up. I don't really pretend to understand the technical reasons, but as a policy it's hard to think why. By my way of thinking, once up stuff should stay up, and can be added to ad infinitum thereafter. This message, on such an innocuous piece, seems downright weird.
Anyway, as the question was posed I felt an answer was/is appropriate, if for no other audience than myself... or you if you are still reading.
The word honesty is used in the piece, and I think that is core. I am luckier than the author in that I do not 'know' as much as she obviously does, so when it comes to consequences I might be less prone to kick off by trying to terrify them.
Thing is, they are getting bombarded from all quarters, and as one of their life guides, along with the missus I do see the need to be there to help wherever possible; a bit of context here, an amplification there... and even the odd 'well, do you believe everything everyone says no matter what?'.
I'm not too sure what they are getting served up as part of the curriculum at school, but thought being shown 'The Inconvenient Truth', even with a side order booklet of 'what it should mean is..' was not the best I'd have hoped for. Especially as many teachers might not be at the cutting edge of knowledge on the issue which, as one who is middling at best is, if we're honest... 'we don't know, but best to get our heads around it now as it might well be very important, though not as important as getting re-elected, generating funds or boosting ratings'.
I certainly was not giving 'em green books at age six, especially any that try to justify their cover price and (often very worthy) contents with a bit of preamble as to why all this stuff might be best to get on board with... NOW!!!!!
There's also a slight danger they might buy too much into the token Twee-Green notions of 'more and more cars on the roads. Maybe too many planes too. Maybe trains as well, but only a little bit' but, as noted, that does allow one to segue into the notion that maybe it's more '...because we had too many lights on too'. After 11 years I am still switching off after them mind.
Thing is, reading such as the Guardian and books like this made/makes me feel really worried, too. And yes, I still feel miserable thinking about it now. Maybe I should, but it's no way to live life to the max. Trust me. I am often in a blue funk bunker mode just trying to figure out what to do, because doing causes stuff, and stuff causes...
So I sure as hell will be doing all I can to ensure my kids learn to live theirs fully whilst also having as good a grounding as I can give them to use only what they need, and to waste as little as possible. In as positive, rewarding and entertaining a way as I can concoct.
Too late for me, but I don't think worry and misery are the best motivators around.
The single greatest threat...
A piece (front page admittedly), by a scientist (not an insignificant one, mind) in a paper (well, speaking of 'significance'... Climate target is not radical enough - study
Meanwhile, the rest of the media and government are a bit busy elsewhere today, tomorrow... next week...
I know I don't usually 'go here', but no wonder this is proving tricky for the public/consumer to get their heads around in terms of truth, priority, best actions...
Meanwhile, the rest of the media and government are a bit busy elsewhere today, tomorrow... next week...
I know I don't usually 'go here', but no wonder this is proving tricky for the public/consumer to get their heads around in terms of truth, priority, best actions...
Connecting Dots - Aunty & ASDA
Just saying's all...
BBC denies £6m raised in sponsorship deals is 'advertising through back door'
Figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act showed that since 2003 the BBC received nearly £6m from sponsorship deals with the likes of Coca-Cola, Procter & Gamble and Asda for 25 live events
Whodathunk?
Junkk archive
Junkk archive
Addendum: Just watching Breakfast TV on Monday morning; Masai Mum's use FLORA, apparently. Looking forward to my cut of the ad revenue, guys.
BBC denies £6m raised in sponsorship deals is 'advertising through back door'
Figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act showed that since 2003 the BBC received nearly £6m from sponsorship deals with the likes of Coca-Cola, Procter & Gamble and Asda for 25 live events
Whodathunk?
Junkk archive
Junkk archive
Addendum: Just watching Breakfast TV on Monday morning; Masai Mum's use FLORA, apparently. Looking forward to my cut of the ad revenue, guys.
Sunday, April 06, 2008
Sunday Highlight
Sadly not in the more common sense of the word, but rather something I feel needs sharing and passed around.
It's about a piece from the BBC site which I noticed and noted. But as I have decided to refrain from most, if not all 'tis/t'isnt (PMWN)CC/AGW arguments for some time I didn't pop up here.
At the time I remember thinking 'O....k, that's a new twist. How long before we get the usual suspects twatting about arguing over this one based on the misuse of the word 'warming' when the climate is behaving damn oddly... both up and down?'.
But at least it was a factual piece, and part of the story. Only, it seems it wasn't telling quite the story some obviously thought it should. And so it seems it was changed.
I am not sure that in so doing, they have helped the cause a lot. And in an era when all these funky archive sites exist, and have legions ready, willing, able and talented enough to trawl them, it makes one wonder just why the BBC thinks it is any different to 'Tricky Dicky' Nixon, and won't get caught.
Here's a wild notion. Tell the truth. Be objective... and let the public think for themselves in trying to decide. That way trust is mainati... oh, heck, who am I kidding? I wouldn't accept a darn word they come out with, at least on anything that involves competing agendas (which is pretty much everything, from CBeebies history lessons to Newsnight twofers'.
Just a shame I am looking at the hiked bill I have to pay to be fed it.
It's about a piece from the BBC site which I noticed and noted. But as I have decided to refrain from most, if not all 'tis/t'isnt (PMWN)CC/AGW arguments for some time I didn't pop up here.
At the time I remember thinking 'O....k, that's a new twist. How long before we get the usual suspects twatting about arguing over this one based on the misuse of the word 'warming' when the climate is behaving damn oddly... both up and down?'.
But at least it was a factual piece, and part of the story. Only, it seems it wasn't telling quite the story some obviously thought it should. And so it seems it was changed.
I am not sure that in so doing, they have helped the cause a lot. And in an era when all these funky archive sites exist, and have legions ready, willing, able and talented enough to trawl them, it makes one wonder just why the BBC thinks it is any different to 'Tricky Dicky' Nixon, and won't get caught.
Here's a wild notion. Tell the truth. Be objective... and let the public think for themselves in trying to decide. That way trust is mainati... oh, heck, who am I kidding? I wouldn't accept a darn word they come out with, at least on anything that involves competing agendas (which is pretty much everything, from CBeebies history lessons to Newsnight twofers'.
Just a shame I am looking at the hiked bill I have to pay to be fed it.
MUFTA - Flaming
It's a new acronym: MUFTA (Metaphor (Unfortunate) For The Age)
And I am not starting off with an enviro one, but just feel like sharing.
I was just watching the news and thought what I saw applicable to kick off.
A minor ex-TV kids' show 'celebrity' gets top billing on Sunday TV through being targeted by a human rights protester whilst participating in a PR stunt first dreamt up by Josef Goebbels, staged by a totalitarian regime feted by a theoretically ethically-driven democratic host country with stuff to sell and its eye on the future.
Welcome to the world in 2008. Now what was/is the Olympics about again?
Addendum - Quote of the day (referring to the, um, minders/bouncers):
'What has Great Britain become when we let foreign government heavies roam our streets beating people up? Do we not have enough of our own home grown thugs in uniform to do that?'
From what I saw I think they were both well represented... and already competing. Faster! Higher! Stronger!
BBC - Newsnight
Gaurdian - This sporting fiasco
And I am not starting off with an enviro one, but just feel like sharing.
I was just watching the news and thought what I saw applicable to kick off.
A minor ex-TV kids' show 'celebrity' gets top billing on Sunday TV through being targeted by a human rights protester whilst participating in a PR stunt first dreamt up by Josef Goebbels, staged by a totalitarian regime feted by a theoretically ethically-driven democratic host country with stuff to sell and its eye on the future.
Welcome to the world in 2008. Now what was/is the Olympics about again?
Addendum - Quote of the day (referring to the, um, minders/bouncers):
'What has Great Britain become when we let foreign government heavies roam our streets beating people up? Do we not have enough of our own home grown thugs in uniform to do that?'
From what I saw I think they were both well represented... and already competing. Faster! Higher! Stronger!
BBC - Newsnight
Gaurdian - This sporting fiasco
Peas in odd pods
An oddity, which I merely share because it highlights the slight disconnect between the various protagonists in the recycling systems: consumer, manufacturer/retailer & authorities.I repeat I don't mean to pick on Morissons; they just happen to be where I shop. Also they are at least trying.
But this one has me flummoxed. Two packs of frozen veg in two plastic, branded packs. Yet one is recyclable, and one is not. Why on earth would that be the case?
Sorry, this is just soooo cool
Nothing to do with the environment, but I just had to share this: 'Jules Verne' pictured over UK
It's not for the story as much as the image at the bottom, where the satellite is tracked real time (look how fast!) over the globe. Awesome.
I'll add the site to the IT Tools page.
It's not for the story as much as the image at the bottom, where the satellite is tracked real time (look how fast!) over the globe. Awesome.
I'll add the site to the IT Tools page.
Government & Innovation
I still am unsure they should go together in the same, well, anything, really.
Telegraph - Towards innovation or inertia?
ps: After too many years in the ad game, often working with public sector sloganeering, I have to say that anything that starts with 'Towards...' is shorthand for '...with no intention of actually ever going there, but simply giving the appearance of intending to'.
It's just a pity it seems to cost (us) so darn much to have them trot out this nonsense so often.
Telegraph - Towards innovation or inertia?
ps: After too many years in the ad game, often working with public sector sloganeering, I have to say that anything that starts with 'Towards...' is shorthand for '...with no intention of actually ever going there, but simply giving the appearance of intending to'.
It's just a pity it seems to cost (us) so darn much to have them trot out this nonsense so often.
I have a simple question: why?
Labour 'killing Britain's renewables industry'
It really seems to defy logic, if nothing else.
And I don't mean the enviROI aspects, I mean what really matters: political, PR, green-spin, etc.
Why are the government in power, seemingly so keen to look green ( at least), being so utterly vague on their support for the hoem alt-eng industry?
At the very least, they have presided over the encouragement of a nascent industry that now, through a bunch of goal-post changes, looks in real danger of collapsing, taking a bunch of decent folk trying to deliver some real alternative options with it.
And with hardly any sensible commentary from anywhere on the reasons, and certainly near zero from the horse's mouth. Bizarre.
It really seems to defy logic, if nothing else.
And I don't mean the enviROI aspects, I mean what really matters: political, PR, green-spin, etc.
Why are the government in power, seemingly so keen to look green ( at least), being so utterly vague on their support for the hoem alt-eng industry?
At the very least, they have presided over the encouragement of a nascent industry that now, through a bunch of goal-post changes, looks in real danger of collapsing, taking a bunch of decent folk trying to deliver some real alternative options with it.
And with hardly any sensible commentary from anywhere on the reasons, and certainly near zero from the horse's mouth. Bizarre.
Gold in green guilt
I am doing something wrong. I am not charging enough. Well, anything would be a start.
It started so well. It's not often that something whacks you right between the eyes, and this really spoke to me, at least initially:
Green sweep
Oliver Bennett is a devoted recycler with a problem - a surfeit of plastic bags, bottles, cans and 'spare' kettles cluttering up his life. Until he calls in an expert ...
'A surfeit' hardly starts to describe the store of bit 'n bobs the Junkk.com warehouse (ie: our loft, basement, outbuildings... I keep making 'em to cope, and they are not pretty being mainly out of reused materials), so this seemed like a godsend.
Trouble is, turns out the piece doesn't really answer my problem... or the one posed above.
And the solutions all seem a bit trendy... and expensive. In fact buying even more things seems high on the list.
A few useful websites, but I think all are on Junkk.com or this blog already. And none, as far as I can see, help you deal with a surfeit of plastic bags, bottles, cans.. etc. The kettle maybe, but only if it works. I have 4 that don't.
So I head for clutterclinic.co.uk. More of the same really. Plus book, plus consultancy fees.
I think I'll stick with Junkk.com, but to help you find uses if you can't bear to throw things out, it looks like my mission to help this 'physician heal thyself' needs to keep searching for solutions. One thing I will concede, from personal experience, are the dangers of letting too much tat build up, and get on top of you.
But not at £60 an hour on top. That would just add to the stress.
It started so well. It's not often that something whacks you right between the eyes, and this really spoke to me, at least initially:
Green sweep
Oliver Bennett is a devoted recycler with a problem - a surfeit of plastic bags, bottles, cans and 'spare' kettles cluttering up his life. Until he calls in an expert ...
'A surfeit' hardly starts to describe the store of bit 'n bobs the Junkk.com warehouse (ie: our loft, basement, outbuildings... I keep making 'em to cope, and they are not pretty being mainly out of reused materials), so this seemed like a godsend.
Trouble is, turns out the piece doesn't really answer my problem... or the one posed above.
And the solutions all seem a bit trendy... and expensive. In fact buying even more things seems high on the list.
A few useful websites, but I think all are on Junkk.com or this blog already. And none, as far as I can see, help you deal with a surfeit of plastic bags, bottles, cans.. etc. The kettle maybe, but only if it works. I have 4 that don't.
So I head for clutterclinic.co.uk. More of the same really. Plus book, plus consultancy fees.
I think I'll stick with Junkk.com, but to help you find uses if you can't bear to throw things out, it looks like my mission to help this 'physician heal thyself' needs to keep searching for solutions. One thing I will concede, from personal experience, are the dangers of letting too much tat build up, and get on top of you.
But not at £60 an hour on top. That would just add to the stress.
Inside the green mind
A piece in the Guardian (where else?).
It's costly having a carbon conscience
And if one of their own can't seem to sort it sensibly, then I despair the rest of us (with a lot less money, connections, etc) doing so.
It's costly having a carbon conscience
And if one of their own can't seem to sort it sensibly, then I despair the rest of us (with a lot less money, connections, etc) doing so.
Saturday, April 05, 2008
IDEA - Solar & Reuse... what a combo!
I was having a surf around the BBC site to try and find out more on their notions on the efficacy of solar, when I happened upon this:
** Set designer creates solar home **
An inventor in Downpatrick has come up with an efficient way of using the sun to heat his water.
What's not to like? Especially as it seems to work pretty well. What I really liked was the reuse of the radiator and double glazing panel; two items in my 'what the heck, they may yet find a use' pile at the end of the garden. Ok, it's rubbish dump.
Actually, if this has worked as well as the piece indicates, I have a few notions of my own that would possible improve the efficiencies of this set up. There are actually scores on the web, from all over the globe, some a lot more sophisticated, but every bit as easy to make, and from spare 'junk', so maybe this can become a mission.
To the shed!!!!
** Set designer creates solar home **
An inventor in Downpatrick has come up with an efficient way of using the sun to heat his water.
What's not to like? Especially as it seems to work pretty well. What I really liked was the reuse of the radiator and double glazing panel; two items in my 'what the heck, they may yet find a use' pile at the end of the garden. Ok, it's rubbish dump.
Actually, if this has worked as well as the piece indicates, I have a few notions of my own that would possible improve the efficiencies of this set up. There are actually scores on the web, from all over the globe, some a lot more sophisticated, but every bit as easy to make, and from spare 'junk', so maybe this can become a mission.
To the shed!!!!
PROF's POSER - Solar, so long...?
Just watched a series of BBC Brekky slots on solar.
Here's a pretty bald statement: 'It's not going to save your bank balance so you'll just be doing it to save the planet'. That'll have them rushing to sign up at B&Q, for sure.
In fact, in a later piece with two commentators, a chap from the Green Alliance (Pro) and a Prof. James Woudhuysen (less so) the knives were pretty much out for any financial sense involved in advocating the things... at least as good ROIs. The GA guy at least was flying the flag for 'better than nothing', at least in an enviro sense.
So in mitigation the talk turned to subsidies.
It was a pity not to have a government spokesperson present (who are scarcer than hen's teeth on anything these days, as it is all pretty much falling down around them and the bunker boys seem to have decided that absence makes the voter grow forgetful) to actually discuss why the support to help such microgeneration is so woeful.
I had to disagree with the good Prof. on one point, where he said that what we do at home doesn't matter at it all takes place at the power stations. True, but if we are not drawing from the power stations then we are surely acting in some mitigation on an individual level where the big boys seem to be failing at every turn on the big stuff?
But there is still one area that still troubles me. And I can't yet get a handle on it from guys paid, a lot, to deal in this area of expertise.
That is the enviROI. What if the planet doesn't get saved either? I don't know, but before committing to what seems a poor financial choice for sure, I'd certainly like to be more certain it is helping the kids' futures if I choose to take the hit for other reasons.
The point was made that these things currently only pay back over a few decades... but that is also their lifespan. What are the consequences in pure eco terms of their being made, shipped, installed, operated, maintained and then being disposed of, when weighed against the obvious benefits of their producing 'free', clean, solar energy through their lifespans?
Is solar heating sensible on any measure in the UK?
ADDENDUM:
Following Dave's suggestion of where I should go in the comments section, OK, I should clarify, and hence have added the key word heating in the last sentence above.
Because here I am referring to the major rooftop installations that are touted, and were featured in the slot, to heat your water and/or home.
My Solarventi dehumidification system does a pretty good job and today, despite it being chilly, is whirring away in the sun, at least for the last few hours, and with luck, a few hours more. I recall we sat down and figured out beforehand the pros and cons based on the purchase costs and operational logistics in comparison, in this case, to an electric dehumidifier running essentially 24/7, 365/365.
I believe we assessed a payback period of around 3 years, which is way within the lifespan of the unit, and therefore a worthy investment simply on cost grounds. I actually think we may need to extend the time period to account for our rather dire national delivery of sun, and the simple problems of getting it on panel when it shines around trees and neighbours' houses (especially when the angle is lower in the winter months). But even so I consider it well worth it. In addition, thanks to the relative lack of moving parts (though many other solar installations are relatively free as well) the maintenance is essentially zero and the lifespan hence very long.
Hence I am pretty confident that both the ROI and enviROI are in the + column.
But this is my point. Especially with stonking great outlays required on the major efforts, the lack of government support and very vague guidance, householders need to get to these figures quickly, easily and with confidence that they are doing right, if not by their pockets but also by the future, too. Do these exist, and if so where?
If our national broadcaster, who is by no means shy when it comes to green advocacy and often none too challenging to all the considerations pro and con, can pretty much damn 'solar' in all its forms in such a piece with the faint praise of 'only being good for the planet', and tar all beneficial aspects with the near certainty of being a financial negative (probably inaccurately, even for some solar rooftop systems - the Germans seem to be doing OK), it seems clear to me that where these things are worthwhile we need clear means to find out and reply upon.
Hence as this is a Prof's Poser I'd welcome information that can be shared to counter this view.
Here's a pretty bald statement: 'It's not going to save your bank balance so you'll just be doing it to save the planet'. That'll have them rushing to sign up at B&Q, for sure.
In fact, in a later piece with two commentators, a chap from the Green Alliance (Pro) and a Prof. James Woudhuysen (less so) the knives were pretty much out for any financial sense involved in advocating the things... at least as good ROIs. The GA guy at least was flying the flag for 'better than nothing', at least in an enviro sense.
So in mitigation the talk turned to subsidies.
It was a pity not to have a government spokesperson present (who are scarcer than hen's teeth on anything these days, as it is all pretty much falling down around them and the bunker boys seem to have decided that absence makes the voter grow forgetful) to actually discuss why the support to help such microgeneration is so woeful.
I had to disagree with the good Prof. on one point, where he said that what we do at home doesn't matter at it all takes place at the power stations. True, but if we are not drawing from the power stations then we are surely acting in some mitigation on an individual level where the big boys seem to be failing at every turn on the big stuff?
But there is still one area that still troubles me. And I can't yet get a handle on it from guys paid, a lot, to deal in this area of expertise.
That is the enviROI. What if the planet doesn't get saved either? I don't know, but before committing to what seems a poor financial choice for sure, I'd certainly like to be more certain it is helping the kids' futures if I choose to take the hit for other reasons.
The point was made that these things currently only pay back over a few decades... but that is also their lifespan. What are the consequences in pure eco terms of their being made, shipped, installed, operated, maintained and then being disposed of, when weighed against the obvious benefits of their producing 'free', clean, solar energy through their lifespans?
Is solar heating sensible on any measure in the UK?
ADDENDUM:
Following Dave's suggestion of where I should go in the comments section, OK, I should clarify, and hence have added the key word heating in the last sentence above.
Because here I am referring to the major rooftop installations that are touted, and were featured in the slot, to heat your water and/or home.
My Solarventi dehumidification system does a pretty good job and today, despite it being chilly, is whirring away in the sun, at least for the last few hours, and with luck, a few hours more. I recall we sat down and figured out beforehand the pros and cons based on the purchase costs and operational logistics in comparison, in this case, to an electric dehumidifier running essentially 24/7, 365/365.
I believe we assessed a payback period of around 3 years, which is way within the lifespan of the unit, and therefore a worthy investment simply on cost grounds. I actually think we may need to extend the time period to account for our rather dire national delivery of sun, and the simple problems of getting it on panel when it shines around trees and neighbours' houses (especially when the angle is lower in the winter months). But even so I consider it well worth it. In addition, thanks to the relative lack of moving parts (though many other solar installations are relatively free as well) the maintenance is essentially zero and the lifespan hence very long.
Hence I am pretty confident that both the ROI and enviROI are in the + column.
But this is my point. Especially with stonking great outlays required on the major efforts, the lack of government support and very vague guidance, householders need to get to these figures quickly, easily and with confidence that they are doing right, if not by their pockets but also by the future, too. Do these exist, and if so where?
If our national broadcaster, who is by no means shy when it comes to green advocacy and often none too challenging to all the considerations pro and con, can pretty much damn 'solar' in all its forms in such a piece with the faint praise of 'only being good for the planet', and tar all beneficial aspects with the near certainty of being a financial negative (probably inaccurately, even for some solar rooftop systems - the Germans seem to be doing OK), it seems clear to me that where these things are worthwhile we need clear means to find out and reply upon.
Hence as this is a Prof's Poser I'd welcome information that can be shared to counter this view.
Friday, April 04, 2008
The end of the cheap takeaway?
Think it will never happen? Think again, as it looks more than likely given that the cost of rice, the staple diet of some 3 billion inhabitants of our little lump of planetary rock, has jumped from $580 per ton to $760 per ton in a matter of a few weeks. A ~30% increase in price simply cannot be absorbed by most outlets, and on top of ever increasing energy bills, huge rises in transportation costs, we should all be prepared to spend a fair bit more than we have been used to on our Saturday night 'special fried rice' and curry sauce.
But the full story, and its potential impact worldwide, from the Toronto Star, seems to have escaped most of the world's meejah. (Well, ours are far more heated up about plastic bag bans, council taxes, the credit crunch, MP's expenses, some head honcho from F1 who has supposedly been enjoying himself a little too much, and what's happening in Eastenders!)
For poverty stricken people in parts of Asia (a large proportion of that 3 billion souls), where 50% to 70% of their tiny subsistence income goes on food, the situation looks dire. And given that demand is ever increasing, with transport and energy costs doing the same, and with an extra 70 million mouths to feed on our planet each year (now that's what I call a damned scary fact!), the long term outlook appears grim.
And wheat and corn prices are still rising too. Maybe I should bring my forecast of the £5 loaf by 2015 forward a few years?
But the full story, and its potential impact worldwide, from the Toronto Star, seems to have escaped most of the world's meejah. (Well, ours are far more heated up about plastic bag bans, council taxes, the credit crunch, MP's expenses, some head honcho from F1 who has supposedly been enjoying himself a little too much, and what's happening in Eastenders!)
For poverty stricken people in parts of Asia (a large proportion of that 3 billion souls), where 50% to 70% of their tiny subsistence income goes on food, the situation looks dire. And given that demand is ever increasing, with transport and energy costs doing the same, and with an extra 70 million mouths to feed on our planet each year (now that's what I call a damned scary fact!), the long term outlook appears grim.
And wheat and corn prices are still rising too. Maybe I should bring my forecast of the £5 loaf by 2015 forward a few years?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)