Is it possible to agree and disagree at the same time

Mixed feelings on this one - No more greenwash, groups tell Government

The start... had me nodding away.

Then I ran into this: 'The good news is that there is now a broad consensus that climate change is real and man-made,'

Really? I am a total convert to doing all we can to reduce whatever we can and avoid waste wherever possible, because I do think there is negative climate change. But at best, on present evidence, I can only accept that whatever might be causing it man is simply making things a lot worse than it need be, and hence any moves to correct 'our' impact need to engaged with asap and big time. Getting some to the notion that mankind's numbers, activities and ambitions might be having an impact at all is proving tricky enough, and I am not sure going for the whole hog in this way won't spark more unnecessarily divisive and distracting stalling debates. Green simply cannot be viewed in such black and white terms if we are to achieve consensus enough to move on and make a difference together.

Meanwhile, on slightly less lofty local issues, to be slightly uncharitable one might ponder whether all these different quangos - with all these different departments and all these different budgets to meet all these different targets - may be competing a tad too much to allow a single (or at least sensibly coordinated) set of messages get through to the hapless punter at large.

I've lost count of the number of different ways I can measure just my carbon footprint, and often feel actual public purse funds would be better spent on tangible initiatives that help me actually DO something, rather than prop up vast empires of folk with massive comms budgets to share various box-ticking awareness-obsessed visions.

100 Billion plastic bags!

We thought that we used a lot here in the UK, but that's the estimate of just how many of the ubiquitous plastic carrier bags the citizens of the USA get through each year. (That's equivalent to about 12 million barrels of oil each year!)

This from the New York Times argues that Americans need a complete change in behaviour before anything will ever be achieved.

I particularly liked the story of the lady who took her own reusable bags to a supermarket where they still packed all her groceries in plastic ones anyway!

"if we can’t change our behavior to deal with this one, we can’t change our behavior to deal with anything."

Well, let's see; with so much heavyweight muscle applied to the pols in the white house by the Big Oil boys and their brethren in the downstream petrochemicals industries, I can't see much significant change in behaviour occurring under this particular administration.

After you

Analogies abound on climate. So I was interested in this from the Economist, recalling a philosophical notion from my school days: Playing games with the planet

No a lot to get too optimistic about, mind.

CONFERENCE - Applied Green - London

MONTH - Now!

FIELD: Enviro-related
WHEN: Oct 3
WHAT: APPLIED GREEN
WHAT... MORE?: 'Applied Green is not your usual conference. It's a festival of minds where the biggest names will tackle the biggest issue we face - the impact of green issues on conventional business and mindsets.

This is a day for anyone from any industry who cares about green issues. As you see from the speakers listed here you will find out about the latest green thinking across a range of fields in just one day.

What about the green debate? While the world obsesses about solutions to environmental problems, the media industry lacks a clear consensus on the environment. The interests that converge on the issue - business, consumers, government and conservation - clash chaotically.

Where's the centre of gravity for this crucial debate in the marketing and advertising arena? Why can't we create it? Why can't we build a green debate around the big themes, subjects and thinking in marketing?

At the end of the day we want to have come up with a leading position for the media industry. We want people to go away having learned about green media as well as green messages. We want to imspire new thinking, new solutions and new inventions and behaviour change.
WHERE: The British Library, London
WHO:
Greg Nugent, managing director, Eurostar
Jonathan Porritt, founder director, Forum For The Future
David Hieatt, founder of Howies.
Philip Gould, Philip Gould Associates
John Grant, co-founder of St Luke's, planner, consultant, author
Michael Bremans, chief executive, Ecover
Eugenie Harvey, founder of We Are What We Do
Adam Morgan, partner, eatbigfish
Naresh Ramchandani, Karmarama founder and Guardian columnist
Ben Terrett, co-founder, The Design Conspiracy
Michael Johnson, Johnson Banks
Marc Sands, marketing director,The Guardian
Matthew Anderson, group director of brand and communications, BSkyB
Russell Davies, Open Intelligence Agency
Dr Arlo Brady, special advisor, Freud Communications
Steve Howard, chief executive, The Climate Group
Arlo Brady, who is special advisor on sustainable development at Freud Communications, there's opinion and thought on the latest sustainability developments at http://greenlightbulb.blogspot.com. There's also an article putting the "greenrush" in a branding context at http://www.brandchannel.com/brand_speak.asp?bs_id=174.
HOW: Sooooo not free!
URL: http://www.eventsforce.net/haymarket/templates/sub/thome.csp?pageID=143561
COMMENTS: Well, it would be nice to go, but it's in London (fair do's; that's where most relevant folk are) and getting close to a grand. So one has to wonder how representative a group of those who care vs. those who can pay there will be. Still, if you want to run shoulders with some and maybe see a bit of green rub off, I guess it's the place to be.

This is posted 'as provided' from their site as a new blog feature

Burma

I don't often get overtly political, and it's not this blog's place to stray too far from enviro issues (that said I have a notion that there is a lot of logging going on there), but I've been sent this which seems worthy: http://www.avaaz.org/en/stand_with_burma/tf.php?CLICK_TF_TRACK

I don't know just how effective online petitions are, but for the effort required I don't see this as anything other than a why not.

The UK is also better than the Swiss at navies (for now)

I clicked on this with some anticipation: Blue skies, yellow sand and shades of green

And this did look like encouraging news: There’s little doubt that the UK is ahead of the green game.

However, I was then moved to comment:

Well, I'll take your word for it that the UK is 'ahead' of Spain, at least.

Though I still chortle as I read my Indy and see an Evian ad or my Guardian and get a 4x4 tootling across the banner. And I must look out for bio at my local Morrisons.

Have fun at the conference. As it's a long way away and a tad pricey at £649+VAT for the day I would have loved to come but for various reasons cannot. I hope those who can afford the time and money to do so will have lots of lovely green wheezes.

Hence your report will be welcome.

Some FT. Some more comment.

I gave a cheer today to this news: End of paid-for content edges closer as FT.com makes changes

Now, what registration hoops will I be letting myself in for as I try and sign on/up?

Indy - FT.com to offer more free content to see off WSJ threat

B(Ad)?

I was so busy posting to a blog today that I almost didn't notice the Google ad that had crept in on my own site.

It was for, of all things, a Washington Lobbying Firm! Pretty much a bunch of guy saying 'we can 'assist' the democratic process any way you like if you have enough dough'.

Sadly, I rotating I lost it and can't seem to get it back to show the darned thing.

However, what I did get was this one under the heading 'Global Warming'. What caused me to pause was the odd notion that in solving it you could 'win a trip.'

Now I am all for incentives and and rewards 'n all. but surely the powers that be can come up with a slightly more appropriate prize these days?

Gis' a twirl

I have tended to dismiss anything that purports to be 'green' when it is associated with the word 'fashion', as the latter tends to depend on the less attractive extremes of consumption, but this looked worth a gander: Supermarket's eco- fashion under threat?

What the author has described kind of speaks for itself and I'll let you decide on the facts vs. the opinion, but it also to me shows the perils of 'dabbling' with issues such as this. And, indeed, those who see themselves as the leaders of the cause.

Every time I see a fashion spread in the Sunday glossies I tend to wince, as I have seen this week'; recycled 'must have' become 'so last year' by the next, which to me is such a mixed up message I'd prefer they just didn't get involved.

Sassybella - Ethical Smethical - Clothing, Ethics and London Fashion Week

Saying and doing

Hot on the sentiments of my last post we move to this: Red tape and cuts see householders give up on green grants, MP says

That last bit made it look like it was simply a bit of electioneering until I saw the party to which the MP belonged.

One can see the... a... any government's dilemma. Almost anything designed to encourage going green either involves less revenue (LPG, etc) or forking out.

But I'm sorry, if the prime minister and other ministers are only capable of renewed pledges to extend Britain's action on climate change, but then allow reality on the ground not to catch up,then at best I have to ask what use they are.

And looking at the money doled out (£624k?)to the number of homes (629?) out of all eligible in the UK, I have to wonder how much was spent administering the whole thing.

Any bets on more than has been provided?

As it is of value, I reproduce here the actual grants as outlined. It may still be worth the effort trying:


Ground source heat pump (water/space heat): Maximum of £1,200, or 30% of the total, whichever is lower.

Solar thermal (hot water): £400.

Photovoltaics (electricity): Maximum of £2,000 for each kilowatt installed.

Wind turbine (electricity): Maximum of £1,000/kw, or 30% of cost.

Micro hydro power (circa 5kw; electricity): Max £1,000/kw or 30% of cost.

Pellet boiler (space/water heat): Max £1,500, or 30% of cost.

· Government grants for pensioners and those on benefits, up to £2,700 for insulation. Councils and energy firm grants also available.

GiGo

I was interested (whilst noting it was but one) in this letter in the Indy: Changes to what can be recycled will result in overflowing bins

Here we have a willing and keen recycler essentially turned to the Dark Side by a system that says one thing but makes it very hard to actually do it.

Now our local kerbside system, the RE:box (logo designed by yours truly) does not present such a problem as no plastics are accepted anyway. I matter, I might note, of some irritation to many who think it should (I am prepared to listen to and weigh the ROI and enviROI explanations if and when provided).

Oddly, in the swimming pool carpark next door there is a dirty great skip that will take plastic. However it's a little vague on what exactly, so I give it all I can on the theory that this will encourage better logistical system from cradle to grave to deal with all the options, or at least sensible communications of what is going on and why.

It will be interesting to see whether efforts will be made to help such as me or, as i suspect, vast funds will be applied to 'dealing' with me rather than the waste I am trying to recycle.

The replies she got are equally telling.

'I continue to be amazed at the wide variation in recycling initiatives, which go from the disgustingly paltry to the exemplary. I would be intrigued to learn why there is such a huge disparity in the schemes currently in place across the country. Surely all councils have access to the same recycling technologies?'

'It does seem as though what started out as a good idea to benefit the environment has been taken over by the bureaucrats and turned into a money-saving exercise.'

The last one I think was written by the Indy's editorial dept.

Lobby horses

When we at the awards recently (have I mentioned that?) we were give a conducted tour of the two Houses, which are connected by the lobby. This is where you can go an grab your MP and get a word in.

Hence, I guess, the origins of the word 'lobby'. Like most things it seems to have moved on a bit and, like most things, I have mixed feelings.

Nobody can be denied the right to speak their piece and, I guess, if those with a bit more wonga can drum up a few more to express then I guess that's democracy in a capitalist society.

Where I am erring on being put offside is when this has all turned into an industry and money, in some form or other (from withdrawal of support for, say, jobs in a community to unmarked tenners in a brown envelope) is used to effect some influence on a voting pattern.

Of course I'm sop naive to see how this can happen, does happen and is very difficult to police.

So I cranked the old eyebrow on getting this (no link that I could see):

GREENS REVEAL OIL LOBBY INVOLVEMENT IN TORY CONFERENCE

Green Party Principal Speaker Dr. Derek Wall today questioned how
'green' the Tory Party can be given their links to big business,
especially the oil lobby, after it was revealed that the UK Petroleum
Industry are sponsoring a 'Tory Green Initiative' event at the
upcoming Tory conference. (1)

Dr Wall said: "Crucial to any real action on climate change are
polices that will reduce our reliance on fossil based fuels, and so
curb our emissions.

"But this is at odds with the needs of the oil lobby, who rely on our
addiction to oil to keep their profits booming.

"If the government got serious about tackling climate change,
companies like Shell would see a stark drop in their profits.

"How can the Tory party be expected to understand, or even agree with
that premise when they are hob-nobbing with organisations like the UK
Petroleum Industry at their conference?

"UK PIA are sponsoring the Tory Green Initiative dinner at their
forthcoming conference. Chris Hunt, the CEO of PIA will speak
alongside John Gummer, Chairman of the recent Tory Quality of Life
report. (1)

"This comes as no surprise, the Tories have long been the party of
big business,with a soft spot for fossil fuels. Alan Duncan, Shadow
Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform,
worked as a trader of oil and refined products with Shell.

"But it isn't just the Tories whose ability to make policies that
focus on tackling climate change is compromised, the Lib Dems are
also finding it hard going.

"Deputy Leader Vince Cable used to be Chief Economist for the oil
company Shell!"

(1) Please see

Now the thing is, in trying to be objective, I could point out that the Guardian Climate Change Summit was in fact sponsored mainly by Shell. On the one hand yes, you could say at least they were trying to make an effort, or on the other it was just a bit of greenwashing. Thing is, they got slaughtered on the day, so I think we could perhaps allow folk the opportunity to make their own minds up on a sponsor's motives so long as the agenda stays clear and open. Hob-nobbing is fine. Nobbling is not. To deny the former is a silly step too far, and in any case would only encourage the latter to happen behind much darker doors.

Equally, tackling the player and not the ball is also counter-productive. OK, Mr. Cable used to be employed by Shell. Maybe he has 'links'; maybe he does not. It would surely be better to judge him on his actions as a Lib Dem pol than allude to old allegiances in such a vague way.

Huh?

I might think I know what I know. What I don't know for sure is what I don't know. And with that Rumsfeldian intro I give you this: Clarity on uncertainty

I honestly had trouble getting to grips with it, and I once assembled an IKEA bookcase.

But this is Nature, and there are certain issues raised that I feel I should share in case you lot can make head nor tail of it.

Where I perk up is here: 'Even IPCC scientists have acknowledged that their treatment of uncertainty is "difficult to communicate". Effectively communicating to a wider audience and reaching the level of transparency now being asked of the IPCC will require a careful balancing act.

And, as I think was indicated in the piece as well, have caution on how the doom and gloom gets sold with such enthusiasm, as it kinda sets the cause back when it's shown to have been a tad over-egged.

I still think we need to cut back and stop wasting, though.

And as I am on a balancing act with this post let me share this one, which I was debating bearing in mind the origin (I think they are a bit on the Republican side, so keep that in mind): Are sunspots prime suspects in global warming?

Mainly, I genuinely liked they way they have embraced the term 'climate change optimists', which I have to say is less pejorative in debate. Now if we can find one for those of an equally passionate disposition on the side facing them in many discussions, we might even see a move to more civilized exchanges and possible compromise. With a view to joint action.

OK, it's Friday. A guy can dream.

Reducing aspirations

As I stare at my Dell LCD screen (Mac mini as CPU), I was attracted of course by this: Green: The New Black - Dell pledges to end carbon emissions by 2008.

"That's clever," I thought, "what are they going to do? Grow 'em?"

Sadly, it was yet another headline to subhead to copy reality check.

But they are boasting about being the first major computer company to become carbon neutral by end 2008. Because it plans to eliminate or offset all of the greenhouse gases it produces worldwide.

Now, as a captain of industry you may not be surprised that I read such worthy tomes as Forbes, but I wasn't too surprised that their greater concern was what it's going to cots, and how the share price will be affected.

I, for one, cannot see anything so terribly bad about computer makers tallying up their "performance per watt," or how much processing power a system can provide while consuming the least amount of power.

But reading on, it seems that scant details about how he hopes to measure the company's green campaign have been provided. Hmmn. Maybe one should talk loudly a bit closer to the time there is something to say might avoid such cynicism?

The Sun Microsystems open-source software program that allows companies to track their carbon emissions sounds fun. I wonder how it works... if it works. Has it got enviROI at its core, for example.

But in ending this seems... sweet. Dell's reforestation program, "Plant a Tree for Me," is now called: "Plant a Forest for Me." That'll do it. I guess 'Steve' from head office (though from his accent I'd say it was Texas) who just called didn't get the memo. He's very keen for me to upgrade to a load new stuff. I wonder if these are grown in the forests?

Oh, you are cards

I hate to be ungrateful, but this was a bit too much not to comment upon. See that picture. It's 250 business cards.

I nice compnay had offered me free sample, and when the word gets free I'm you're man.

So when postie knocked on the door I wondered what the big box contained. I remained none the wiser as I encountered the gorgeous laminated box with a huge brochure inside listing printing prices.

And then I found it.

Guys, I love ya to death and AM impressed with the work. But if you are sending stuff out to a company that is trying to save the planet (or anyone else for that matter), I'm sure you can get you message across without quiet such a show of resource .

More Directorial input

This just in: WRAP Retail Team restructure

On an equally positive note: WRAP Funded Project Leads to Packaging Savings for Marks & Spencer

By all accounts, it 'can save at least ten per cent of the packaging material used on those products'.

Which must make for a big saving in costs to retailers who are funded to try it.

How do you lean on balance?

Gosh, this is a tricky one: Legal battle on Gore climate film

On the one hand, if someone said they were/are going to show my boys a film that raises questions on most any topic, especially climate, I'd say 'go for it'. And then, probably forget all about it.

I'll still say it (though we have it in the DVD library downstairs... they were not keen on a night of Daddy's choice in films, sadly), but might now reserve the right to chat with them afterwards. Think of those spoof school videos from the Doug McClure character on the Simpsons. Mayeb with Groundkeeper Willie intoning 'Ye're alll doomed!'.

My first thought is that we've moved on a lot since then. The warnings are still apposite, but the detail is dated. Or, if this from the objector's counsel is to be believed, open to question on some key bases: "Given the serious inaccuracies in the film and the misrepresentations it contains, the film is irredeemable". I'd certainly like to see this pack.

BBC review - 'Most glaring was the pitifully small screentime he gave to solutions'. I know a sequel to correct that (with, fingers crossed, enviROI included) is en route. Maybe it would be better at least to wait?

I wonder what else my kids get shown that has been sent by those who think they should see what they deem 'necessary, and leave it up to a teacher to decide how it gets discussed for balance. The phrase 'can 'o worms' springs to mind.

Brand Republic - Al Gore's environmental campaign appoints global agency

I'm a celebrity, get me a Green gig!

Rik Mayall stars in green TV campaign for Devon council You know I love choosing the best messenger for the message.

Presumably the perils (to nature) of little 4WD off-roaders didn't feature.

Now, who can we commission to look into this?

Consultancies 'more interested in billable hours' than expertise

Excuse me, I'm still rolling around on the floor.

AWARD - Future Friendly - November 30th

WHEN: Friday November 30th
WHAT: The Future Friendly Awards?
WHAT... MORE?: They are looking for people who have promoted sustainable living. An individual can only nominate themselves or a group or project that they are involved in for a Future Friendly Award.
HOW MUCH: Free!
URL: http://futurefriendly.co.uk/whatIs.php
COMMENTS: If you qualify... why not? I'm in!