Space, the final...solution?

I'd already posted on this baby, but in reviewing the posts (a lot, but some good ones, so I broke my 'no more than 100' rule) I found I might have been hasty in my critique of our reaching for the stars efforts. Well, at least the punting rich geezers up there bit , anyway.

As there are some here who seem to know, I would like to tap into the collective intellectual resource being brought to bear to help me with a question.

For a while I have been perhaps a tad less than fair to one Mr. R Branson in having doubts on his claimed green campaigns - towing planes to take-off (did that ever happen?), biofuel-powered planes (could that ever happen?) and £25M eco-prizes (does that include waiving the rights to profit sharing?) - especially when one of his highest profile current extravaganzas seems to be sending rich tourists into space atop what I had thought to be a massive column of greenhouse gasses.

Now it seems that I may have been unjust, and it's all 'just' (I have to presume there's a smidge of energy in the production, and possibly a tad of pollution still involved in the combustion) oxygen and hydrogen, though I also do recall steam to be considered a greenhouse gas.

We have a most helpful earlier offering as regards Ariane, but can anyone enlighten me as to what other space borne efforts, including Virgin Galactic, actually do consume and exhaust?

ADDENDUM:

One of the (many) frustrations of a moderated system is that Qs can cross with As, and debates can get a tad jumbled. A classic of the former has just happened here, and I pretty much got my answer in an overlap. Fortunately, it seems my usual admittance of bozoness, combined with a quest for answers, was not far off the right track. Unless this latest guy is wrong, I guess. He doesn't sound like he would be, though.

Gentlemen... unfurl your sails.

Not convinced: Powerboat plan to go round world in 65 ecofriendly days

'Course, not using any combustible fuel at all and sailing using
no-emission wind power is perhaps a tad more eco-friendlier still -
if you are sincere in trying to make some point about saving the
planet, and not just scoring a few greenwash points and column inches
whilst having a hell of a jolly.

Discus..

..ted.

BBC interviewers 'too frightened of offending big business leaders'

BBC business news failing impartiality test, says report

Meanwhile, our elected representatives continue to lead by example...

Noting the source, but the facts still seen clear: Prescott stretches 'junket' into family holiday

Ditto: Blair’s farewell tour stains his green legacy with carbon

Sunday Telegraph - Things we won't miss: Two Jags, 19.8 staff, a £2.4m bill

Green Rush The Growers... Oh

I'm not sure, but the likes of Jeremy Clarkson and Dubya must be allowing themselves a small sherry and a snicker about now.

This is what it looks like online: Organic move to cut food flights

I don't know if it was/is a SlowNewD, but what I saw on the TV screen seemed a tad less calm. In fact more knickers seemed to be getting twisted than a tornado passing through the Ladies' Unmentionables Department at your local M&S.

And, as always, I think the consumer, closely associated by the planet, looks to be coming out of this dazed, confused and a lot worse off. But at least the ratings are going to be healthy, so there are some winners.

So far I have seen a succession of green interest groups, with a few others from the pro-Bono end of feeding the world/poor lobbed/ing in for good measure, pretty much knocking spots off each other as to who is more worthy, and why their cause is better than someone else's. All on a nice salary and pension no doubt. I never knew there were so many spokespersons for things 'I'm not quite sure what they actually do' around.

I just hope that out of all this furore in a Fairtrade coffee cup there may be a result that has a good enviROI. Just because it has come from another country doesn't mean it has cost the planet as much, as force rearing artificially here can be worse. And the packaging may mean it gets consumed rather than consumer-unacceptable quality material simply gets ditched.

Of course, what I don't seem to have heard to much is the odd notion of us not expecting to have it all, all the time, on demand. And though I am usually pretty pro-choice and pro-consumer, for a retail spokesperson to say they have to do it to meet consumer demand is a tad disingenuous.

Times - Green masterplans make Sainsbury’s boss see red

Indy - Organic movement faces split over air-freighted food

Indy - Dominic Lawson: A lesson in how to dig yourself into a hole


Thank you for this piece. Most thought-provoking.

I have a saying, which I have used so long I may have actually nicked it and forgotten I had: 'Nothing that is green can be viewed only in black and white'.

Sadly we seem to be moving into a ever more complex eco-areas, but those who can and should know a lot better (including some in the media) are in my view making matters (In assessing eco-value I tend to apply my own measure on most things: the enviROI, or return on investment to the environment, which I admit is in itself is simplistic by being more concerned with immediate climate change impacts than social costs) a lot worse by applying some very hasty, poorly-considered cookie-cutter initiatives for more than dubious reasons.

I am in particular vexed by what I see these days in the arena of all things 're', with meeting targets and paying out bonuses as a consequence often taking precedence over actually doing any good.

I would like to think we could afford a few brief moments to take a breath and think through some hugely expensive, often woefully negatively impactful and almost inevitably uncancelable endeavors before leaping into them. And asking what exactly we, and the plant are actually get for the vast sums that seem to be paid to those who would claim to be qualified to manage this on our behalves, often with almost no real accountability.

Telegraph - Organic vegetables face air freight ban

Mirror, mirror, pure and clean; just like my image if I'm Green.

How Green is Blair?

I managed to miss this episode, both live and in the next day online follow-up. Which is frustrating, and also renders me ill-equipped to comment in an informed manner. But as this hasn't stopped most media much these days, here goes.

Noting that now ex-Ethical man a few posts over has managed to generate in excess of 100 replies (to not too many here, bearing in mind this is discussing the enviro-record of the guy who has overseen our green performance for the last decade, and set much that is yet to happen in place) to support his justifications for getting back on air again, as it is relevant I would like to offer one opinion.

In asking 'How Green is Blair', or indeed any person who would seek to tell us how to take on this colourful hue, surely a major factor must be in looking at what they say vs. what they do.

In the case of Mr. Blair the politician, I am presuming the story I missed laid bare his record. I'm sure it was illuminating, and his explanations hand-wringingly sincere and 'adept' at satisfying his and the news media's agendas.

However, I am still trying to reconcile how anyone who doesn't seem to feel what he 'needs' to do (for instance, the global lecture circuit - to pay for a lifestyle choice he and his family seem to enjoy and seek to maintain) as it 'isn't practical not to', is different and exclusive to what the rest of us are facing.

I am prepared to be lead by visionaries, but only those who can also do so by example. Otherwise, they can go fish.

I used to be ethical, but now I'm not it's all ok

Has flying been unfairly demonised?

So I watched the cause of reduction being simply being played with for a year, and then figuratively as well as literally get dropped into the bin at the end.

Now, having waded through a lot of interesting, useful, worrying and frankly gob-smackingingly scary stuff here, I think the most potentially damaging thing to the environment I have read is in the original post: '...now that I’m not Ethical Man'.

You can do a lot more damage from within. Ask any Trojan.

Hope the ratings were worth it.

Charity begins...?

It must often seem I have a bit of a 'thing' about charities.

Ignoring for now the value they have as a complementary source for social good, they certainly also provide an incredible re:use function as well.

And when done well, on both counts, I am here to applaud and support. For instance, as mentioned before, by trying to figure how to use Junkk.com to divert the much dreaded plastic bag for where it is not wanted... to where it seems it is. That first poster is asking for your old, clean bags!

However, I also feel they can get it wrong, and the other poster is an illustration. I was actually directed to it by an old lady neighbour, who was not impressed. I have to agree. It's bad enough them getting to compete unfairly with rate-paying retailers selling new goods at cut prices, (my view is that they should be re-selling nifty second hand bargains alone), but the symbolism of selling 'brand new hats for Ascot' just didn't sit right.

I think they can find a niche in our consumer sector, and it need not be restricted to a grubby one, but not in this way, with such luxury goods possibly made for the purpose and competing with a nearby haberdasher struggling to compete in a harsh climate.

Building Bridges

As I am more in the habit of burning my bridges before I get to them, it is nice for a change to see some valuable construction work bear fruit.

Yesterday I was strolling back through town when I chanced upon an expo (well, a few stalls) in the Market Square, one of which was festooned with 'recycle now' banners.

Now, as may be recalled, I am a little chary of some from this sector, having felt Junkk.com to have been at best poorly served, and at worst rather dubiously treated by a couple of dodgy dealers of theoretically green-promoting largess in the past.

Anyway, fresh from swallowing my pride at Total Packaging, and with luck forging new and useful bonds with a WRAP big-wig, and having found a new soulmate at Eden Project (whose previous PR director treated me and our lovely Head of Prose and Comms Anita so shabbily a few years back) the other day in London, I decided to see if the magic may apply on a more local basis.

Well, fingers crossed, it looks like it may. I had a very nice chat with Jeremy, the officer of the day, and as a consequence ended up talking with the head bod for Hereford and Worcestershire's enviro efforts. And, thanks to this, we should see a whole new level of synergistic bonding taking place. For a start, they were happy to have our stuff on the stand, so I dashed home to get a standee and flyers to them asap. And these will now be touring around, much as the Junkk.com demo kit is currently doing in Cumbria. They help me; I help them. How sweet is that?

And to kick off from our side, I am happy to share what they were doing there, which was promoting a kitchen waste sink macerator device, with added grant. And very nice both look too, both environmentally and financially.

I initially had my doubts, and expressed them rather starkly by asking 'How the heck does flushing pureed waste down my sink help the planet?'.

Well, the answer was simply and convincing, if disappointing to learn that (as is too often the case) it is not applicable in very many other places.

Because it seems that our local water guys have in place a system to collect biogas from the sewage system, and better yet then recover the resulting dry matter for use as fertiliser. And that makes for a 'win win' in my book. So I will be applying and installing asap, as it is also not beyond the ken of a fair DIYer... apparently.

I'll still be using the compost bins for most organics as I think I can find uses for this at home, but as this machine will chew up the rest and squirt it to enviROI+ nirvana, it gets my full endorsement and with-feet vote.

Nice one council, water board and others! Let's hope such an initiative catches on everywhere.

For those in the relevant areas, once they give me the PR and details I'll upload it.

Scott and Peter and Ted and Malice

The ongoing, spooky (at least as it seems to mirror my life) genius that is Dilbert.

Forces of IT evil - 0, Peter - 2

Well if that isn't asking for it, I don't know what is.

Two small victories for me over my LCD (lowest common denominator) screen status. Well, 1 and three quarters.

First, up, having blown 3 times the price of a Windows compatible, I at least have a Skype phone, on my Mac, that seems to work. That is, I made a call and received one. Whether I will do it without the help of a tech expert next time is another matter. But I am now online and freely available... literally, if sometimes not actually able to come to the phone.

The other is our first test of the upgraded Junkk.com site. Very exciting, except for the fact that a lot didn't work, which is why we have it on a test server. Can't wait to let it loose. New homepage with auto-updates of latest ideas and blogs. New functionalities such as a much more useful edit/delete function on JunkkYard. And some major glitches sorted. Sweet.

Well, when they work.

Oh, what a waste of...?

I was an odd youngster. Where others were wearing their hair long and their politics left, I was usually considered a touch on the Tory side. Which annoyed me a lot, and actually such labels still do bug me for their all-encompassing nature, as it seldom adequately described where I was coming from, which was trying to assemble personal best from the policies that all sides were espousing.

But one thing was sure, when it came out, I really didn't see the problem with Poll Tax. While a few others most certainly did. Riotously so. Maggie outingly so. I can't recall exactly when it was now, but it may have had something to do with me owning my first flat and sharing it with a mate, and our paying on where it was and not what we used had something to do with it.

Hence I find myself with odd, and conflicted feelings about all that surrounds the newly-announced Waste Strategy and all the media surrounding it, a small sample of which (noting how the leanings of some are evidenced by the spin they put on the same facts) can be surveyed here:

Telegraph - England's rubbish crisis -
Telegraph - Cash carrot to curb the family's rubbish -
Telegraph - Miliband offers recycling carrot -
Telegraph - Households to face £30 recycling fines -
Times - Waste Not, Want Not -
Times - Pay-as-you-throw scheme for waste ‘penalises householders’ - 'Recycling volumes will rise most quickly if the Government smooths the path of those who make a living from reuse and reclamation. There is no place yet for fining or taxing those individuals yet to appreciate the benefits of an afterlife for their rubbish.'
Times - Councils ‘need money to meet costly targets’ -
Mail - Now you'll have to pay to take your rubbish to the tip - But if they try to avoid these charges by driving their domestic refuse to the tip, they will have to pay anyway.
Express - DUSTBINS: NOW WE FACE FINES AND TAXES - Lower-income households receiving council tax benefit - often families with young children - could also be exempt, despite generating relatively large quantities of waste with nappies and other trash - er, excuse me...?
Indy - Cash rewards to reduce rubbish disposal - Every household in the country could have at least five bins in the future to allow separate collections for glass, paper, cans, plastics and food waste, though not garden refuse - tell that to Elsie in her flat opposite!
Indy - Legislation to tackle excess packaging - I still await how 'excess' is defined any better than 'necessary' without also clamping down on every other aspect of consumer culture, from advertising to fashion.
BBC - Bin charges 'to boost recycling'

By any measure, I should be up there waving from the rooftops. It seems to be exactly what the young me was in favour of, and how the old me lives. But...

There is an odd unease in the land of Martin at the logic behind it, the competence of those who would put it into effect, and the actual enviROI that is going to be derived vs. the social divisions, public rejection and possible 'targets rather than tangibles' measures to be imposed.

I choose to be optimistic, as there is a lot of talk of reward and incentive, but this has to be complemented by the mechanisms to do the right thing easily and conveniently. People are starting to wake up to the fact that much of what is out there is a big fine waiting if you do not work for free for councils who you pay, and who pay contractors big money already. I don't mind doing my bit, but certainly want it appreciated and acknowledged. I do not like being forced to act in support of overpaid and inefficient systems, especially under threat. On a personal level, but also as a matter of logic, if segregated recyclable materials are a resource, why would I be penalised for bringing them to a collection centre? Should I quickly throw out all I have collected over the last few years into one massive, mixed black plastic bin liner and simply drop it outside. How on earth does that serve the environment????!

There is also the not so small matter of what is actually being done, and what is seen to be done. A few too many of the proposed initiatives smack of populist window dressing, tackling high-profile but irrelevant targets at the expense of real ones. There still seems a typical, massive, and hugely wasteful focus on trying to deal with the end point problem by using those who have little control over it all as scapegoats, when so much more could, and should be done (and a heck of lot more transparently in a financial sense) as things go into the consumer system before they become disposable.

For my kids' futures, I expect substance, and not window dressing, and if they can't find a way to sell it to the public with their existing methods, maybe they need to change. Or be changed.

Here it is: DEFRA

The Big Apple Bore

New York may be a greener place but it's also become boring. Whatever happened to Sin City?

I am very much of the view that anything is better than nothing, and anyone is better than no one when it comes to making the planet a better place for future generations. So if it's boring it may be preferable to being interesting for all the wrong reasons.

And hence I have to say most on the list of initiatives seems pretty tame, logical and, with luck, likely to have a welcome effect.

Where I do get concerned, from billionaires upwards, is when the actual agenda is not too driven by altruism.

While the positives may still outweigh the negatives, there is a very broad and complex series of factors at play here, from difficult to quantify ones like 'awareness' and 'public motivation', to simple, tangible carbon reduction.

While not always easy, I try and judge all I am served by its enviROI, the actual benefit to what goes up in smoke at the end of the day, as this seems to be our most pressing area to address.

Sadly, and all too often, I find too many fail by being more minded to meet a target, score a rating, a political point or push a project through. And that does not help my kids' futures.

All roads (and train lines) lead to London. Darn it.

Caption 1 - The carpark at Didcot Parkway. Rich in symbolism, I felt.


Caption 2 - The goodie bag from the do. I'd have to say a few trees were hurt in the making of this show. Ah well, all in a good cause. And I did get a few things I can now re:view.

For a London boy, I find myself oddly in dread of going there. Yet, inevitably, I find myself doing so, again and again. Big lights, big city. Centre of all things.

Yesterday was another long day, but a worthwhile one.

The trip itself was very pleasant, both ways, though at four hours in either direction totalled a working day alone. I have been further experimenting with my options, and this time decided to try Didcot Parkway in another car/train combo.

By way of nerd analysis, I break down the trip in several ways, pretty much in this order of importance:

1) Cost (miles, fare, parking, tube, etc)
2) Time (on the road, on the train, hanging about for connections)
3) Convenience (turn up and step on or sweat on a connection)
4) Reliability (will they shut the motorway... again. Will the cancel the train.. again)
5) Flexibility (can I turn up or do I need to book? And can I change my plans?)
6) Comfort (sitting in my case next to the loos. Sitting at Swindon waiting for the missus to get me)

The drive was lovely, but did take 2hrs. I'd say petrol was pretty fair, especially as I took the small car. What was nice was the ticket price (except the parking) - £20 - but it was pretty restrictive. It kicked in at a a fair (fare?) enough post-rush hour 9.30am, but had a rather inflexible, pre-4pm, post 'lord knows how late' return, which made for an undignified early duck out and some Cinderella style scampering to get there to avoid becoming a pumpkin (or end up being penalised). This added the additional 2hrs. Other than standing on the way back, it was all comfortable, but the time and convenience was pretty low. Not sure I'd do it again, as all I managed was a rushed few hours to do the biz.

And this was two-fold. First up was to meet a potential advisor on hooking up with venture capital/business advisers for RE:tie. This went very well and is looking promising. I'd not go so far as to say that RE:tie is a no-brainer, but in the current climate its business applications are pretty clear... IF handled well. I came away feeling this chap knew where I was coming from and, more importantly, what and who it would take to make the journey to where I want to go a decent one for all concerned.

The other bird that got duly well stoned was the annual Bray Leino (possibly the world's most soothing homepage) networking bash (oddly, though this was held in London, most there who I met were from anywhere but). This is a specialist eco-PR agency who I came across as a consequence of them and us being involved with ecover. Sadly no one from that company was there, but a lot of other more than interesting, and I hope mutually regarding folk were. Such as dyson (new product out, which I plan to review soon), ecotricity, green.tv... and innocent. And it's true what they say - you can be as virtually whizz-bang as you like, but it really only happens in person over an organic quiche and a glass of fresh OJ (I made that last bit up).

Bonds were forged, with luck, and opportunities will I hope soon be created.

You can call me 'Al'

ETHICAL MAN GOES GLOBAL

'Newsnight's one-time Ethical Man, Justin Rowlatt, travels (somewhat unethically by plane) to India - ETHICAL MAN GOES GLOBAL'
-----------------------

I don't know how he fared with families there, but he didn't do too well here. As to whether it was 'somewhat' something ending in 'ical', ethics were not the first thing that sprang to mind.

Glibly admitting the blatant nature of a 'don't do as I do; do as I say' reason, if not excuse, really doesn't (green)wash any more, even with the sad attempted justification of 'raising awareness'. But it is still being trotted out as if it justifies anything, no matter how superfici-al (another one) done in the name of eco.

As Saint Bob Geldof recently opined about the forthcoming Live Earth concerts: 'We are all pretty [gosh darn] aware enough already, and really don't need a bunch more celebs flying all over the place to tell us'. Such as Mr. 'Well, you know, not flying isn't really practical...for folks like ME' Blair, 'You can call me - in my Lear - Al' Gore, Leonardo 'I try to fly commercial' diCaprio, Richard 'So it's a few rich guys atop a column of greenhouse gasses to have a Kodak Moment in the stars - but I've sponsored a prize' Branson' and every eco-writer whose doom and gloom book has been preceded by a global promo tour.

All followed, or mirrored by just as '-al' journalists who seem big on justification and low on irony. I imagine it will not be long before Justin has to fly up to the icy wastes to join half the BBC already there 'studying' what Global Warming is doing to the icy wastes, thanks in part to all the folk flying up there to 'study' it.

Sure it may be your job. But that's the point. We all have jobs, and a lot of them involve some form of flying. If you won't... can't... shouldn't have to forgo this in the name of earning a living, why the heck should anyone else? THAT is the only message all this fake concern for the environment conveys. The BBC trumpets the world's largest network of correspondents, so why do we need one to fly, presumably with crew, to India to report on it there? If it's for a quick entertainment ratings fix then admit it, but don't try and pretend it is 'somewhat unethical' or has one whit to do with concern for our planet or kids' futures upon it.

I just look forward (with dread) to when a few thousand Indian journalists come over here to see how our water levels are doing, followed by a newly affluent middle class from Asia who as a consequence don't think any restrictions need to apply to them either. No wonder, with such a message from the media: 'whoever it is, it isn't me'.

THIS was his first return at living ethically having ended his year and dropped the 'attempt' like last night's leftovers in the waste bin???! He can, apparently, because he's 'no longer ethical'. Well, golly, that's all right then.

No wonder George isn't giving up his car. Good to see he can get his aircon fix at M&S though. I guess paying for plastic bags here soon will make up for it.

Nice one, BBC... nice one.

VIDEO

Team.. er.. Work

Or... jobs for the boys & girls?

Just got this press release:

Office of the Third Sector appoints four Deputy Directors to spearhead new team structure

The Deputy Directors will each lead a new team, created as part of the recently announced OTS restructuring and coming into effect on June 4, and play a pivotal role in the leading and implementing the Government's approach to the third sector.

The range of skills and experience of the new appointees, encompassing considerable achievement in both public and third sectors, will help the OTS strengthen levels of understanding and partnership between the third sector and every level of government.

Now, while I am all for strengthen levels of understanding, and positively over the moon about the possibility of partnership (well, still waiting for any yet, but I'm sure it's coming), and accepting this is an exciting new sector to 'engage' with, but I do have to wonder what four new DDs and 'teams' adds up to in terms of service delivery and ROI to the taxpayer.

Just asking.

Those who report on the rich and famous are different to you and I...

... they evidently have no shame:

Indy - Her Majesty's parliamentary press corps are hopping mad. For years
they have had the privilege of parking their cars for free in the
Mall but there has now been a crackdown. Hacks will now have to fork
out 2,200 pounds a year for parking on the Mall, which is set to make
for an interesting set of expenses over the coming months.

Why, pray, do they need a car in the first place?

'No flies on us' zone

Nothing like a good bit of in-depth, critical repor... printing of a press release:

Global travel firms unite in climate-change drive

I look forward very much to the arrival of any bio-fuel that is 'carbon free', as I rather suspect that some may still be involved.

However, in the great trading scheme of things, if we are on a possible window measured in decades, it may be wise, no matter how unpalatable to the current lifestyle expectations of the richer nations and their populations, to also look at the possibility of a little less gadding about in the first place. That way we don't have to knock down forests to make the stuff and burn it in the first place.

Pretty please:)

You scratch my back?

A curiously uneditorialised press release being reprinted here, all the more odd as it is from a rival paper group:

Murdoch: I'm proud to be green

Just one quick question; one of many this piece raised in my mind. As they obviously exist, but given that my 1/2sqm solar suitcase promises 13W on a good day, how exactly do these work?: '...practical measures include solar-powered golf carts to carry people round..'

'Aving a LARHF

Mars forced into u-turn over animal products

There seems to be a whole new level of 'aving a LARHF (Left And Right Hand Foul-up) these days, where it almost beggars belief that one side of a marketing-driven organisation can institute something without those who may offer valuable views (especially to avoid boo-boos) having a say.

In this PC, inclusive, multi-allergic world, a major fmcg didn't commit to adding an animal-based product to some ranges where before there was none, without someone in the decision chain going: 'Er, hey guys, what about...?'.

Then again, if it were not for the cost involved and the amount of egg that should rightly be spread over various faces (with all due deference to Vegan sensibilities), have seen the more than chipper spokeslady making the most of the media interest last night, one could almost be forgiven for thinking that 'any publicity is good...'. Like it was meant to be:)

National Vegetarian Week (21-27 May 2007) - Gosh, what a coincidence!