And that applies to all of us. It will be of little surprise to everyone that energy bills are going to rise again later this year; but it may come as a surprise to anyone already struggling with household bills that the level of increase may be in the region of 30% to 40%! Full story is from the Telegraph.
Strewth! A rise of that ilk is going to push a hell of a lot more people into 'fuel poverty' (the Gov's rather quirky term for those that cannot afford to pay to keep themselves warm).
And while oil prices do not seem to be showing any indication of coming down, despite some key analysts claiming the current price is 'spiked' due to speculators, the value of your house looks set to plummet!
Everything is beginning to look like complete doom and gloom! Yet I keep hearing people from our Gov scoffing every time anyone mentions the 'Recession' word!
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
EVENT - Bristol Design Festival/Eco-Design Show
UPDATED INFO
WHEN: From the now 'til at least July 6, if not a bit longer, like the 18th (tbc - now confirmed!)
WHAT: Bristol Design Festival - Eco Design Show
WHAT... MORE?: The Bristol Design Festival is an annual celebration of creativity, design and innovation in Bristol and the South West. Presented by a group of volunteers who believe passionately about design and the city of Bristol. They believe it is about time Bristol and the South West got the recognition it deserves as a region of design excellence and a hub of creativity. The Eco-design show is pretty much a 'does what it says on the tin' 'off-broadway' event around this. And offers a nice RE-use complement to the predominantly RE-cycle theme of the venue.
HOW MUCH: Free
URL: http://www.bristoldesignfestival.com/
COMMENTS:
As part of this, Junkk.com is proud to have been invited to have a presence at the 'Eco-design' show.
This runs from now to Friday 18 July, 9-18.00. Best to call first. 0117 925 0505
It is located at The CREATE Centre, Smeaton Road, Bristol BS1, 6XN
As you'll see, ours more of a small demo stand, but there are bits and bobs, and some other nifty stuff. Frankly, not worth a city to city jaunt for the show alone, but as the pictures will show, the centre itself is in a heck of a nice setting, easy to access and has (I know, tsk) good parking. Well worth a call if you are a Bristol resident to see you tax dollars and LA-greenophilia at work.
Prof's Poser - Strike a light?
BBC News is doing a report on the National Trust replacing all its light bulbs... 'which has an immediate environmental benefit'. Does it?
I have written, simply to ask;
I have just watched your piece on the National Trust replacing 40,000 lights in their properties with low energy variants. Obviously much better for energy consumption and financial savings (after the initial costs, unless sponsors Philips - nice ad - are covering that. Shame the public does not get this advantage).
I'd just like to ask whether this also represents an immediate environmental saving whilst the report indicates the old bulbs 'will be recycled'. That would suggest perfectly good, if inefficient bulbs are to be discarded.
It would be interesting to know what the break-even points - environmentally, if not financially - there are used to help judge the most effective courses.
Is the BBC stating categorically, on advice, that it is better environmentally (allowing for 'costs' of manufacture, etc), to swap to low energy bulbs right away, rather than let them expire naturally and replace at this point?
If so, this is well worth promoting further.
My point (if not by me) has been made, with the blonde and bouffant saying it is a good one. Why do I suspect that this will be as far as an important issue of enviROI is passed over... again?
I'd simply like to know what to do that is best. Not to make a cute piece of PR puff.
Telegraph - About time National Trust moved to energy -saving lightbulbs
I have written, simply to ask;
I have just watched your piece on the National Trust replacing 40,000 lights in their properties with low energy variants. Obviously much better for energy consumption and financial savings (after the initial costs, unless sponsors Philips - nice ad - are covering that. Shame the public does not get this advantage).
I'd just like to ask whether this also represents an immediate environmental saving whilst the report indicates the old bulbs 'will be recycled'. That would suggest perfectly good, if inefficient bulbs are to be discarded.
It would be interesting to know what the break-even points - environmentally, if not financially - there are used to help judge the most effective courses.
Is the BBC stating categorically, on advice, that it is better environmentally (allowing for 'costs' of manufacture, etc), to swap to low energy bulbs right away, rather than let them expire naturally and replace at this point?
If so, this is well worth promoting further.
My point (if not by me) has been made, with the blonde and bouffant saying it is a good one. Why do I suspect that this will be as far as an important issue of enviROI is passed over... again?
I'd simply like to know what to do that is best. Not to make a cute piece of PR puff.
Telegraph - About time National Trust moved to energy -saving lightbulbs
Monday, June 23, 2008
Common sense?
Or politically correct madness? I'll leave that up to you, the reader, to decide.
This from the Telegraph highlights a study undertaken by a group of scientists on what may happen if the EU follows through with proposals to ban a number of commonly used herbicides, insecticides and fungicides.
I actually worked on a project directly related to biocides and the amount of time and effort taken up in chemical risk and hazard assessment was simply extraordinary. Plus, as far as I was aware, ALL chemicals used in biocides known to pose ANY sort of toxicity threat were withdrawn from use during the 1970's & 1980's.
"A ban on chemical products used to control disease, pests and weeds would create food shortages, lead to soaring prices and increase Britain's dependence on imports."
"The yields of staples foods such wheat, potatoes and green vegetables would all be severely hit if the majority of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides, all of which have been certified as safe and which are commonly used by farmers - are banned."
OK, so reducing the number and amount of chemicals used in agriculture does seem, at first glance, to be a pretty sensible idea. But, and this is the big question, at a time when basic food prices are going through the roof, and we probably need to actually increase yields, a blanket ban that might actually reduce crop yields by between 25% to 50% seems to me to be rather questionable.
Having some friends who have just come back from holiday in Spain and who have pointed out that over there, individual bar owners can decide whether their premises are smoking or no smoking, what's the betting that the UK would be yet again the only member of the EU to take any notice of a ban on the use of biocides anyway?
This from the Telegraph highlights a study undertaken by a group of scientists on what may happen if the EU follows through with proposals to ban a number of commonly used herbicides, insecticides and fungicides.
I actually worked on a project directly related to biocides and the amount of time and effort taken up in chemical risk and hazard assessment was simply extraordinary. Plus, as far as I was aware, ALL chemicals used in biocides known to pose ANY sort of toxicity threat were withdrawn from use during the 1970's & 1980's.
"A ban on chemical products used to control disease, pests and weeds would create food shortages, lead to soaring prices and increase Britain's dependence on imports."
"The yields of staples foods such wheat, potatoes and green vegetables would all be severely hit if the majority of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides, all of which have been certified as safe and which are commonly used by farmers - are banned."
OK, so reducing the number and amount of chemicals used in agriculture does seem, at first glance, to be a pretty sensible idea. But, and this is the big question, at a time when basic food prices are going through the roof, and we probably need to actually increase yields, a blanket ban that might actually reduce crop yields by between 25% to 50% seems to me to be rather questionable.
Having some friends who have just come back from holiday in Spain and who have pointed out that over there, individual bar owners can decide whether their premises are smoking or no smoking, what's the betting that the UK would be yet again the only member of the EU to take any notice of a ban on the use of biocides anyway?
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Words & Deeds
It's a survey, so we grab that pinch of salt now. But, considering it's in the Observer, one does tend to take note:
Poll: most Britons doubt cause of climate change
Especially as it does rather serve what I bang on about. Which as an aside shows how polls, and consequent editorialising, can easily be selective.
I don't propose to argue one way or t'other about CC, or even the ProbablyManWorsenedNegative variant I subscribe to, but this does beg the question as to the credibility and effectiveness of all those who have taken to 'educate'/influence the public in this matter. And ask why 'they' (well, to an extent, 'we') are proving so poor in getting their messages across. Which leads me to their qualifications to be allowed to carry on, not in freedom of speech terms, but when vast amounts of public money are consumed to fund these efforts.
On my other blog I have expressed some concern at the ongoing attempts by a few in the political and chatterati firmament to blame everybody but themselves in polls that did not go the 'right' way, often taking it to the extreme of suggesting 'other' views should be suppressed and/or that the general public is not qualified to judge. Hence I crank an eyebrow at this: 'Some environmentalists blame the public's doubts on last year's Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, and on recent books, including one by Lord Lawson, the former Chancellor, that question the consensus on climate change.' That's 'a' programme and 'a' book, both widely dissected by those of a more climate pessimistic nature with frankly vast resources. And the notion is the people are being seduced by such as these? There is a worrying similarity with the recent and ongoing Irish EU situation, where by having a contrary opinion there seem a really rather ugly group think being engaged upon against those who do not conform with the 'consensus'. Faced with such as this my nature is almost to kick back just for the naked obnoxiousness of the stance being taken and the uncritical homage demanded.
I have to say I have sympathy with this form Bjorn Lomborg, who '..said politicians and campaigners were to blame for over-simplifying the problem by only publicising evidence to support the case.' Of course this is a critique that can apply to (and I hate such generalist terms) other 'sides'.
Hence I find this from the Department for the Environment to be making a key point: 'The IPCC... concluded the scientific evidence for climate change is clear and it is down to human activities.' Unless there's a bit left out, is it that clear, definitive... and certain? It's all due to human activity? I remain unsure, don't recall it be proven, and hence such claims do rather cause me to crank an eyebrow at anything else such entities may come up with.
Meanwhile such as this does not help either: '...six out of 10 agreed that 'many scientific experts still question if humans are contributing to climate change'.
It all seems so all or nothing, 'if you are not for us, you are against us'. And history has shown how well those stances have served.
So here is a worrying, but frankly unsurprising finding: 'More than half of those polled did not have confidence in international or British political leaders to tackle climate change'.
Whatever the message is or should be, I remain firm in my belief the current crop of messengers need to be reviewed.
Poll: most Britons doubt cause of climate change
Especially as it does rather serve what I bang on about. Which as an aside shows how polls, and consequent editorialising, can easily be selective.
I don't propose to argue one way or t'other about CC, or even the ProbablyManWorsenedNegative variant I subscribe to, but this does beg the question as to the credibility and effectiveness of all those who have taken to 'educate'/influence the public in this matter. And ask why 'they' (well, to an extent, 'we') are proving so poor in getting their messages across. Which leads me to their qualifications to be allowed to carry on, not in freedom of speech terms, but when vast amounts of public money are consumed to fund these efforts.
On my other blog I have expressed some concern at the ongoing attempts by a few in the political and chatterati firmament to blame everybody but themselves in polls that did not go the 'right' way, often taking it to the extreme of suggesting 'other' views should be suppressed and/or that the general public is not qualified to judge. Hence I crank an eyebrow at this: 'Some environmentalists blame the public's doubts on last year's Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, and on recent books, including one by Lord Lawson, the former Chancellor, that question the consensus on climate change.' That's 'a' programme and 'a' book, both widely dissected by those of a more climate pessimistic nature with frankly vast resources. And the notion is the people are being seduced by such as these? There is a worrying similarity with the recent and ongoing Irish EU situation, where by having a contrary opinion there seem a really rather ugly group think being engaged upon against those who do not conform with the 'consensus'. Faced with such as this my nature is almost to kick back just for the naked obnoxiousness of the stance being taken and the uncritical homage demanded.
I have to say I have sympathy with this form Bjorn Lomborg, who '..said politicians and campaigners were to blame for over-simplifying the problem by only publicising evidence to support the case.' Of course this is a critique that can apply to (and I hate such generalist terms) other 'sides'.
Hence I find this from the Department for the Environment to be making a key point: 'The IPCC... concluded the scientific evidence for climate change is clear and it is down to human activities.' Unless there's a bit left out, is it that clear, definitive... and certain? It's all due to human activity? I remain unsure, don't recall it be proven, and hence such claims do rather cause me to crank an eyebrow at anything else such entities may come up with.
Meanwhile such as this does not help either: '...six out of 10 agreed that 'many scientific experts still question if humans are contributing to climate change'.
It all seems so all or nothing, 'if you are not for us, you are against us'. And history has shown how well those stances have served.
So here is a worrying, but frankly unsurprising finding: 'More than half of those polled did not have confidence in international or British political leaders to tackle climate change'.
Whatever the message is or should be, I remain firm in my belief the current crop of messengers need to be reviewed.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Big Oil returning to Iraq?
I have to confess I wondered how long it might be before the big oil boys started to try to get back into Iraq. This from the Independent reports that they are already negotiating their return with the Iraqi government.
So overthrowing Saddam was, hmmmmmm, solely about weapons of mass destruction? Methinks likely not.
Addendum:
Looks like I'm not the only one pondering that last statement - see this very enlightening article from ukwatch.net, which suggests that peak oil concerns were the primary reason for the war in Iraq.
So overthrowing Saddam was, hmmmmmm, solely about weapons of mass destruction? Methinks likely not.
Addendum:
Looks like I'm not the only one pondering that last statement - see this very enlightening article from ukwatch.net, which suggests that peak oil concerns were the primary reason for the war in Iraq.
The new Mercedes Smart 'ForTwo' ...
... model looks set to be arriving in the UK in 2009.
Although it only has a lowly 45bhp common rail diesel engine, it will be another vehicle joining the C.C.D.C. (Congestion Charge Dodging Club) as it only emits 88g/km of CO2 per kilometre. But probably the best thing about it is that it manages a staggering 85mpg fuel economy!
Full story and more detail from Autocar.
Although it only has a lowly 45bhp common rail diesel engine, it will be another vehicle joining the C.C.D.C. (Congestion Charge Dodging Club) as it only emits 88g/km of CO2 per kilometre. But probably the best thing about it is that it manages a staggering 85mpg fuel economy!
Full story and more detail from Autocar.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
More on Arctic Ice
Or perhaps that should read 'less of'?
Although this last winter the Arctic ice extent was greater than that of 2007, during which a record year for summer ice minimum coverage was established, it would appear that this year may also break that record.
This from BBC News reports on how the melting of the Arctic ice appears to be accelerating faster than ever.
Interestingly, some ice research groups are now predicting an ice free Arctic summer as early as 2013! How long before big oil's exploration rigs start to move in?
Although this last winter the Arctic ice extent was greater than that of 2007, during which a record year for summer ice minimum coverage was established, it would appear that this year may also break that record.
This from BBC News reports on how the melting of the Arctic ice appears to be accelerating faster than ever.
Interestingly, some ice research groups are now predicting an ice free Arctic summer as early as 2013! How long before big oil's exploration rigs start to move in?
Car-mort
I feel like Earl Hickey in 'My Name is Earl'. We're talking karma.
First the bad... then the good.
Today I set off mid afternoon for an eco-networking event in London. Actually two, and that seemed, well, too good not to combo.
As it was finishing quite late I figured driving, at least most of the way, was the only option to be able to get back home. Karma disagreed.
I could have trained in from Gloucester. I could have opted for the more motorway-friendly (if thirstier) Volvo. But no, I nicked the missus' Golf to eke out the juice.
Unfortunately this was not a good plan. At least, it was great until Reading. Then things went the shape of the pear in the form of a water pump exploding.
But Karma then smiled. I managed to get off the motorway. Thanks to mobile technology and sensible insurance I simply popped the bonnet and called up the RAC and waited. Ralph appeared within 15 minutes.
And he went the extra mile... literally. All the way back to Ross, and beyond his radius. But as he agreed, it would have been bad for the planet to call a truck to take us back when it made much more sense for him to tow me then and there.
Hence I write this now and not midnight. Thank you Ralph. However, Karma, you are a feisty minx. Maybe there was a reason I was meant to miss that event. But there'll be another. I even managed to get the host on the horn and tell him my plight, and he was cool.
It could have been better, but also a lot worse.
Addendum - Now, why did I have to rush to print. No more smile like the pic above;(
The garage just called. I dod the right thing in driving on a bit to get out the fast lane and stick the car off motorway asap, but in so doing killed the engine. Totally. So now I either scrap a perfectly good shell or pop in a replacement. Actually one option I'm thinking is popping in a more frugal engine.
Anyway, driving tip:
When the water temp warning goes on, as soon as it is safe to do so...STOP! And don't be tempted to move any more.
Addendum 2 - Sheesh, Karma is toying with me. Dan, of Greenbang.com, whose event I was headed for, has kindly offered to do a story on Junkk.com and RE:tie in his very good, very widely read publication.
Swings... roundabouts.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Red top in the morning, global sheperd's warning
A nice link I have been sent: ‘Ye Olde Hot Aire’*: reporting on human contributions to climate change in the UK tabloid press
Brilliant, but shame it did not have a management summary!
Addendum -
No sooner posted than sorted. A kind addition from a fellow forum member. A lot better, but still, a mouthful:
IOP PUBLISHING ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
Environ. Res. Lett. 3 (2008) 024002 (8pp)
Abstract
This letter explores daily print media coverage of climate change in four United Kingdom (UK) tabloid newspapers: The Sun (and News of the World), Daily Mail (and Mail on Sunday), the Daily Express (and Sunday Express), and the Mirror (and Sunday Mirror).
Through examinations of content in articles over the last seven years (2000–2006), triangulated with semi-structured interviews of journalists and editors, the study finds that UK tabloid coverage significantly diverged from the scientific consensus that humans
contribute to climate change. Moreover, there was no consistent increase in the percentage of accurate coverage throughout the period of analysis and across all tabloid newspapers, and these findings are not consistent with recent trends documented in United States and UK ‘prestige press’ or broadsheet newspaper reporting. Findings from interviews indicate that inaccurate reporting may be linked to the lack of specialist journalists in the tabloid press. This study therefore contributes to wider discussions of socio-economic inequality, media and the environment. Looking to newspapers that are consumed by typically working class readership, this article contributes to ongoing investigations related to what media representations mean for ongoing science–policy interactions as well as potentialities for public engagement.
Sorry if I missed it if it was in there. Sadly not always the time to go through all such things in detail, which is kind of the whole problem suggested. Though I suspect many tabloid editors do go through... and then choose to take certain directions anyway.
There is of course the base stance being taken as read as well. I'd also note in passing that though the audience for this is specialist, there may be an argument to try and package key points in a way to get the desired message across a tad more easily.
My old mantra of the fault being not so much with those you don't convince, but with you for failing to convince them.
Brilliant, but shame it did not have a management summary!
Addendum -
No sooner posted than sorted. A kind addition from a fellow forum member. A lot better, but still, a mouthful:
IOP PUBLISHING ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
Environ. Res. Lett. 3 (2008) 024002 (8pp)
Abstract
This letter explores daily print media coverage of climate change in four United Kingdom (UK) tabloid newspapers: The Sun (and News of the World), Daily Mail (and Mail on Sunday), the Daily Express (and Sunday Express), and the Mirror (and Sunday Mirror).
Through examinations of content in articles over the last seven years (2000–2006), triangulated with semi-structured interviews of journalists and editors, the study finds that UK tabloid coverage significantly diverged from the scientific consensus that humans
contribute to climate change. Moreover, there was no consistent increase in the percentage of accurate coverage throughout the period of analysis and across all tabloid newspapers, and these findings are not consistent with recent trends documented in United States and UK ‘prestige press’ or broadsheet newspaper reporting. Findings from interviews indicate that inaccurate reporting may be linked to the lack of specialist journalists in the tabloid press. This study therefore contributes to wider discussions of socio-economic inequality, media and the environment. Looking to newspapers that are consumed by typically working class readership, this article contributes to ongoing investigations related to what media representations mean for ongoing science–policy interactions as well as potentialities for public engagement.
Sorry if I missed it if it was in there. Sadly not always the time to go through all such things in detail, which is kind of the whole problem suggested. Though I suspect many tabloid editors do go through... and then choose to take certain directions anyway.
There is of course the base stance being taken as read as well. I'd also note in passing that though the audience for this is specialist, there may be an argument to try and package key points in a way to get the desired message across a tad more easily.
My old mantra of the fault being not so much with those you don't convince, but with you for failing to convince them.
At a loss for... anything really
For the second time today, I have noted a strange absence of activity where I would have expected... hoped for more.
One was a self-serving piece of tosh from Tony Blair, upon which I decided to make a brief comment if only to highlight that all it warranted was a brief comment (OK, none would have been more eloquent, but I don't believe I was going to be the only one, and so in true Prisoner's Dilemma fashion broke ranks first - at least the consequences of that action will not be as serious as other compromises (that have been) made).
Now there is this: Ten green bloggers
But so far (10.48am, mind-morning)... nothing. Maybe there is nothing to say. I must say I am a bit stumped and so have opted, for now, to write nothing (well, excepting this). But this a big issue, with some big names... in the biggest online UK green media-friendly blog.
It says 'The next stage of the campaign is spreading the word. The blogosphere is already buzzing with the story'. O....k.
Thing is, I guess by sharing I have done a bit, but I am not sure what it is, and without going back or re-reading am not too sure what that might be anyway. Oh... this might help: canvassyourmp.com
Catchy.
Is that the best ways forward? Hmmmn. I noted it more because of how it hadn't been noted. Anyway, it seems worthy enough (though I will need to assess what is being asked. I might sign up for the newsletter, and hope this will not be counted as offering support... yet... for anything that I might not be so keen on, by simply showing an interest). Anyway... enjoy.
I'll pop a note in to come back subsequently to check and see. Maybe it's a slow burner.
One was a self-serving piece of tosh from Tony Blair, upon which I decided to make a brief comment if only to highlight that all it warranted was a brief comment (OK, none would have been more eloquent, but I don't believe I was going to be the only one, and so in true Prisoner's Dilemma fashion broke ranks first - at least the consequences of that action will not be as serious as other compromises (that have been) made).
Now there is this: Ten green bloggers
But so far (10.48am, mind-morning)... nothing. Maybe there is nothing to say. I must say I am a bit stumped and so have opted, for now, to write nothing (well, excepting this). But this a big issue, with some big names... in the biggest online UK green media-friendly blog.
It says 'The next stage of the campaign is spreading the word. The blogosphere is already buzzing with the story'. O....k.
Thing is, I guess by sharing I have done a bit, but I am not sure what it is, and without going back or re-reading am not too sure what that might be anyway. Oh... this might help: canvassyourmp.com
Catchy.
Is that the best ways forward? Hmmmn. I noted it more because of how it hadn't been noted. Anyway, it seems worthy enough (though I will need to assess what is being asked. I might sign up for the newsletter, and hope this will not be counted as offering support... yet... for anything that I might not be so keen on, by simply showing an interest). Anyway... enjoy.
I'll pop a note in to come back subsequently to check and see. Maybe it's a slow burner.
CATEGORY - Metering
Usage based charges. What could be fairer? Or better to help reduce consumption?
I have dabbled in the past (check the labels below), but feel this needs be given its own section... and sub-sections.
ELECTRIC
Guardian - Pay as you glow? - A vexed issue, evidently. And yet again, something superficially simple seems more convoluted between consumer, corporations and those who would govern.
Guardian - Shock tactics
GAS
WATER
I have dabbled in the past (check the labels below), but feel this needs be given its own section... and sub-sections.
ELECTRIC
Guardian - Pay as you glow? - A vexed issue, evidently. And yet again, something superficially simple seems more convoluted between consumer, corporations and those who would govern.
Guardian - Shock tactics
GAS
WATER
Sharing the love
I stumbled across this from our ex-PM.
Blair: what my charity work taught me
Ignoring, for now, the content, it seemed a pity that, at time of writing, no one had written a thing, I thought I'd add a few words of encouragement and appreciation as only one truly inspired by his words and deeds, past and present, can be: Good luck with all of that.
I am sure it will be money well spent. Well, in know it's charity and all, but there will be expenses, etc, to cover first. And 7 mortgages plus daily global criss-crossing don't cover themselves, you know.
Blair: what my charity work taught me
Ignoring, for now, the content, it seemed a pity that, at time of writing, no one had written a thing, I thought I'd add a few words of encouragement and appreciation as only one truly inspired by his words and deeds, past and present, can be: Good luck with all of that.
I am sure it will be money well spent. Well, in know it's charity and all, but there will be expenses, etc, to cover first. And 7 mortgages plus daily global criss-crossing don't cover themselves, you know.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
'Tax to go ahead' shock
I was looking through this: Microchip bin tax scheme to go ahead despite failures (front page in the Mail)
It's all worth a read, but in light of what is clear by the facts have to wonder if it's all the best use of scarce funds.
It's all worth a read, but in light of what is clear by the facts have to wonder if it's all the best use of scarce funds.
Buddy, can you spare a lime?
Crunch-hit consumers restricted by price of green products, report says
Well, there's a thing.
After my initial 'Well, d'uh!', there are a few interesting aspects to note.
'.... widespread dissatisfaction over the variety of green products offered by retailers,' is one I was not aware of.
'...shoppers on average paid 45% more for environmentally friendly and fair trade goods.' is one that amazed me.
'Shoppers said they are only willing to pay a premium of about 20% for greener products.' made me think there are a lot of folk with a lot of money.
"Consumers want to make sustainable choices, but are hampered by unclear messages. Confusion, coupled with high prices, leads to a lack of trust...'' comes as no surprise.
While 'More than 6 in 10 consumers questioned said reducing the amount of packaging on products was the most important action retailers and consumer goods companies could take to help the environment' makes me wonder why Junkk.com and RE:tie are proving real challenges to get across with the business community.
I really am starting to think the marketers and business brains in this country would would miss an opportunity even if it folded itself in neat notes in their wallets.
Well, there's a thing.
After my initial 'Well, d'uh!', there are a few interesting aspects to note.
'.... widespread dissatisfaction over the variety of green products offered by retailers,' is one I was not aware of.
'...shoppers on average paid 45% more for environmentally friendly and fair trade goods.' is one that amazed me.
'Shoppers said they are only willing to pay a premium of about 20% for greener products.' made me think there are a lot of folk with a lot of money.
"Consumers want to make sustainable choices, but are hampered by unclear messages. Confusion, coupled with high prices, leads to a lack of trust...'' comes as no surprise.
While 'More than 6 in 10 consumers questioned said reducing the amount of packaging on products was the most important action retailers and consumer goods companies could take to help the environment' makes me wonder why Junkk.com and RE:tie are proving real challenges to get across with the business community.
I really am starting to think the marketers and business brains in this country would would miss an opportunity even if it folded itself in neat notes in their wallets.
AWARDS & EVENTS CATEGORY TEMPLATE
Helping us help you promote your award/competition/event:
WHEN: Deadline/closing date for awards, when it's taking place for events
WHAT: Title
WHAT... MORE?: A little bit of blurb is always worth it
HOW MUCH: We like free. But can live with a fee if it's worth it
URL: http://www.[yourURLhere]
COMMENTS: This bit we keep for us... we know stuff:)
Now just fill in and fire off to info@junkk.com, and if it looks like a plan we'll pop it up.
WHEN: Deadline/closing date for awards, when it's taking place for events
WHAT: Title
WHAT... MORE?: A little bit of blurb is always worth it
HOW MUCH: We like free. But can live with a fee if it's worth it
URL: http://www.[yourURLhere]
COMMENTS: This bit we keep for us... we know stuff:)
Now just fill in and fire off to info@junkk.com, and if it looks like a plan we'll pop it up.
Musing on a motorway
Yesterday I was travelling to and from a VC-pitch contest in Bristol (more on this later).
First up I was not doing it in the Volvo. And this is a car designed to lollop along motorways.
No, I was in the missus' Golf, while she took mine.
The reason was simple: cost (and this, plus time, was why I wasn't in a train). I don't happen to like it as there is no way I can afford to get a car that does what The Volvo does, only cheaper, but my actions were shaped by market forces.
The other was not on the motorway. Just after Gloucester I got on the road that takes one back to Ross. And on my tail, the whole way, mostly through countryside, I was bang on 50, 40 and 30mph.
After 15 miles I had a tailback of 20 cars. Ironically, if the police car had been at the front I suspect we'd all have got there a lot quicker. And safer.
Because, despite having a Road Angel, without cruise control I had my eye glued on the speedo the whole time, as the merest blip on the gas or downward slope was taking me over the limit, even by the 10% allowed'.
This was... is...plain stupid. Rules vs. common sense. Box-ticks vs. desired result. And from the look on the police driver's face as I checked along the route, he thought so to.
First up I was not doing it in the Volvo. And this is a car designed to lollop along motorways.
No, I was in the missus' Golf, while she took mine.
The reason was simple: cost (and this, plus time, was why I wasn't in a train). I don't happen to like it as there is no way I can afford to get a car that does what The Volvo does, only cheaper, but my actions were shaped by market forces.
The other was not on the motorway. Just after Gloucester I got on the road that takes one back to Ross. And on my tail, the whole way, mostly through countryside, I was bang on 50, 40 and 30mph.
After 15 miles I had a tailback of 20 cars. Ironically, if the police car had been at the front I suspect we'd all have got there a lot quicker. And safer.
Because, despite having a Road Angel, without cruise control I had my eye glued on the speedo the whole time, as the merest blip on the gas or downward slope was taking me over the limit, even by the 10% allowed'.
This was... is...plain stupid. Rules vs. common sense. Box-ticks vs. desired result. And from the look on the police driver's face as I checked along the route, he thought so to.
NEWS/Commercial PR - RE-USB
I like to reward sincere efforts.A wee while ago I was sent the PR that follows.
Actually, this is a product I am happy enough to endorse as I bought several and, frankly, what's not to like?
These are rechargeable batteries, which is already nifty in my book, but they can also be recharged in the USB slot of your lappy, which makes 'em downright, well, space-saving (no need to lug along a charger for one, well, assuming you are taking a lappy along. And who doesn't have a slot you can borrow at destination?) at the very least.
Thing is I was feeling a bit eyebrow-cranky, and alighted on the bit about the actual longevity.
Prove that, I said, and you will get a slot on the blog and even in the next newsletter (April's is looking good for July at the 'mo).
Well, bless 'em, they have. Maybe not 'proof' as such, but a very firm claim from the horse's mouth: 'You enquired whether the rechargeable battery would last forever. I contacted the inventor Simon Daniel who said that the USBCELL battery can be recharged up to 500 times before the in-battery chemistry degrades. Normal rechargeable batteries can be re-used on average under 10 times, so the comparison is very impressive.'
Now I blooming well hope the various other reusables last a bit more than 10 times (I must check their small print now. See a press release I study; a pack in Maplins I don't), but I have decided to bite. Here it is, E&EO:
Re-usable USBCELL Battery could save UK Landfill and Recycling Fines
Recycling Week began badly with news that Britain faces millions of pounds of fines for not collecting and recycling batteries. However, renewable power specialist Moixa Energy has the answer – with their award winning USBCELL , which is already saving millions of batteries from future UK Landfill.
Says Moixa CEO and founder Simon Daniel. “Our USBCELL Batteries can be ‘Recharged Anywhere’ by simply plugging them into one of the billions of USB ports on desktops, laptop or games devices”.
“The solution is not just consumers recycling more (how many people even know about Recycling Week) [I certainly forgot , even if I did. Nice to see all those quango comms £'s hard at... er.. work - Ed], it is the responsibility of all companies and designers to rethink entire product categories to become more re-usable and sustainable.
Batteries are a clear example of waste, with over 15 billion (equivalent to a column to the moon and back), made and thrown away each year. Traditional rechargeable batteries require a charger/adaptor to be made, found and carried – so sadly are on average only ever re-used under 10 times before being discarded.
USBCELL batteries solve this by embedding a compact USB connector and circuitry inside the battery so that no separate charger is needed. Each USBCELL can save over 3kg of landfill and 7kg of C02, in basic re-use, and significantly more if fully re-used. Whilst government departments, BBMA (British Battery Manufacturers Association) and environmental groups debate how to raise UK collection from the current 2-3% to the 25% required under the EU Batteries Directive, USBCELL has already saved the UK several jumbo jets' worth of future landfill.
USBCELL is also soon to be available in other battery formats (e.g. AAA), and is also being developed for application with leading mobile phone brands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)