Well, at least the majority of teenagers seem to be growing up aware of the problems that they are going to inherit from their forefathers. As reported by Greenpeace.
"Two thirds of those polled believe climate change will have a negative effect on their lives."
Let's hope we act in time to minimise the effects on them, their children and their grandchildren.
____________________
There is just a chance that the sun itself will help to mitigate the temperature rises likely due to man, as it appears to have entered a period of very low activity. According to this from the Belfast Telegraph, we really ought to be heading into a mini ice age.
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Living in the anthropocene
Basically, that's a scientific term coined for the particular part of the earth's history when humanity is having a noticeable impact on the planet's biosphere; it is, in fact, exactly where we are today.
[The biosphere, by the way, is that teeny-weeny microscopically thin band around our planet that all life survives in. Look really, really carefully. Why? Because it's so thin, you can't even see it on this beautiful image of our little lump of planetary rock.]
As the legions of pols, 'experts', negotiators and media hangers-on enjoy their get together in Bali, there are many commentators pondering on the possible outputs, both socio-economic and political, as well as the potential end effect of humanity failing to take significant efforts to rectify the situation. This report on BBC Comment by Malini Mehra, is one such. I found it interesting, if perhaps, at least to my mind, a little on the naive side, though I fully endorse her final comment that "As the delegates in Bali reflect on our future, they would do well to think as human beings."
Unfortunately, a human being is a pretty selfish animal, and most will, if push comes to shove, do whatever they can to protect their own family and kind. I.e. Man thinks, and largely acts, locally, not for humanity as a whole. My biggest fear is that should inaction turn out to be the primary output from Bali, significant portions of humanity will finish up over the next few decades between a rock and a hard place, with a distinct lack of survival resources (mainly food and water, but undoubtedly oil and all its derivatives, primarily fuels, will also be a major factor too), and that this will be the gunpowder that starts off a chain of (at first small and local, but later probably developing into WWIII) resource wars. Let's face it, there are already many warnings in place of food and water shortages, both current and predicted, as this from Reuters highlights this very day; and we have talked about the implications of Peak Oil many times on this very blog already. On top of that food prices have started to rise inexorably - see Fox News. "The world's agricultural production is projected to decrease by 16 percent by 2020 due to global warming". Just for a minute consider the implications of that statement; and on a planet where the human population is rising rapidly! And we've not even mentioned the potential issues that rising sea levels could heap upon the problem.
I really, really hope that I'm totally wrong, but if mankind's history can be taken as an indicative pointer to the future, then I don't see too much hope unless genuine and significant action is taken now. (Well, yesterday really.)
In reality, it would appear that the future depends upon the legions of pols, 'experts', advisers, negotiators and media hangers-on, currently sunning themselves in Bali. And you wonder why I feel pessimistic about it?
If humanity doesn't get its finger out soon, the Anthropocene could turn out to be one of the shortest eras of geological history.
Space, the final (af)front...
In light of my oft-cocked eyebrow at some who claim green whilst promoting space tourism, I think Dilbert has provided the necessary cover illustration.
It ain't easy making green
Last night I watched the tail end of Dragon's Den.
I had to say that, as always (and why I gave up a long time ago), it and all involved (bar the pitchers) made my skin crawl.
What made me hang on was the fact I was awaiting the subsequent show, and the piece in question was heralded as 'environmental', and that they were getting a lot on this these days.
The question should not be so much that the only real interest these rich, successful, glided titans had was how how to make money out of this, with the barest of tilts to just trying to do a good thing and make money too, but that I was still surprised that these icons of all that the viewers want to be were so.... devoid of any consideration for anything beyond the mighty £.
But such pragmatism is a necessary complement to succeed, and you need to succeed to make a difference. Ergo, deals with devils need to be made. £40k for 40% of a business ain't one I'd make, however, no matter how desperate.
It really isn't easy being green. Even less so to make real money out of it (unless you are an offshore wind farm maker with a tame MEP and nifty lobbyist, or trying to score funds to run a ban-wagon in your town - the latest anti-plastic bag affair I noted got £1000 to pursue their aims).
But I plug on. What doesn't help is to see that some much bigger, better organisations and more established outfits are struggling too.
Support Grist
I wish them well. Won't be sending any dosh as, well, I need all I can scrape for Junkk.com, but at least maybe I can send 'em a few more clicks via this blog to help the cause.
I'm nice like that.
I had to say that, as always (and why I gave up a long time ago), it and all involved (bar the pitchers) made my skin crawl.
What made me hang on was the fact I was awaiting the subsequent show, and the piece in question was heralded as 'environmental', and that they were getting a lot on this these days.
The question should not be so much that the only real interest these rich, successful, glided titans had was how how to make money out of this, with the barest of tilts to just trying to do a good thing and make money too, but that I was still surprised that these icons of all that the viewers want to be were so.... devoid of any consideration for anything beyond the mighty £.
But such pragmatism is a necessary complement to succeed, and you need to succeed to make a difference. Ergo, deals with devils need to be made. £40k for 40% of a business ain't one I'd make, however, no matter how desperate.
It really isn't easy being green. Even less so to make real money out of it (unless you are an offshore wind farm maker with a tame MEP and nifty lobbyist, or trying to score funds to run a ban-wagon in your town - the latest anti-plastic bag affair I noted got £1000 to pursue their aims).
But I plug on. What doesn't help is to see that some much bigger, better organisations and more established outfits are struggling too.
Support Grist
I wish them well. Won't be sending any dosh as, well, I need all I can scrape for Junkk.com, but at least maybe I can send 'em a few more clicks via this blog to help the cause.
I'm nice like that.
You, Me, Dupree... and the BBC
I ended up here for another reason. I ended up staying a tad longer.
With the IPCC report and Valencia now it seems but distant memories, with the full brunt of Bali doubtless soon to wash over us as the 15-20,000 concerned country delegates and their entourages chew on the thorny issue of climate change, I'd like to make a small plea for more in-depth reporting on the factual issues.
I am brought here having noticed a side bar on 4x4s, where plain inaccuracy is excused as 'shorthand', and will be 'looked at more carefully'. Along with 'learned from' this has to be one of the most dire and ineffective attempts to not really provide a good reason, let alone explanation, or offer an reassurance on the quality of reporting we can expect to get.
It is also simply not good enough to rely on any old press release as gospel just because it has a green tint.
From electric cars not having any emissions (the exhaust is just in another place) to wind farms with rather optimistic ratings to plastic bag bans (are we really going to get a town by town piece all around the country? Modbury was 'first'. OK) that may not actually be as 'friendly' as shared (this may show why it is a lot more complex and worthy of deeper consideration: http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/11/junkk-category-plastic-bags.html ), I simply think that we, the consuming public, need a better explanation of all the issues, warts and all, to help decide our actions.
By green-gilding everything uncritically and without thought, you run the risks of a) misinforming, b) encouraging poor practices, c) simply disappointing or d) giving unnecessary ammunition to those who would advocate a less concerned, more hedonistic approach to our planet's precious resources.
Green is usually one heck of a good thing. But you still need to look at each and every aspect of it on what can be some quite complex interactions and/or merits before shoving any old stuff out in its name.
There are simply too many who see it only as the colour of money or the rally of a 'ban-wagon', and will use it for less noble ends than the saving of this planet.
And if as the efforts of the organisations above would suggest, and as echoed by our government and media such as the BBC, this is the greatest challenge we face as a race, then it surely deserves to be taken a lot more seriously, to the highest standards of journalistic challenge, at every level.
At the moment too much is being pumped out as an '... and finally', by the most junior of staff, and the consequent tone, lack of investigation and/or frequent errors are eroding the good and necessary works on the much bigger picture.
With the IPCC report and Valencia now it seems but distant memories, with the full brunt of Bali doubtless soon to wash over us as the 15-20,000 concerned country delegates and their entourages chew on the thorny issue of climate change, I'd like to make a small plea for more in-depth reporting on the factual issues.
I am brought here having noticed a side bar on 4x4s, where plain inaccuracy is excused as 'shorthand', and will be 'looked at more carefully'. Along with 'learned from' this has to be one of the most dire and ineffective attempts to not really provide a good reason, let alone explanation, or offer an reassurance on the quality of reporting we can expect to get.
It is also simply not good enough to rely on any old press release as gospel just because it has a green tint.
From electric cars not having any emissions (the exhaust is just in another place) to wind farms with rather optimistic ratings to plastic bag bans (are we really going to get a town by town piece all around the country? Modbury was 'first'. OK) that may not actually be as 'friendly' as shared (this may show why it is a lot more complex and worthy of deeper consideration: http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/11/junkk-category-plastic-bags.html ), I simply think that we, the consuming public, need a better explanation of all the issues, warts and all, to help decide our actions.
By green-gilding everything uncritically and without thought, you run the risks of a) misinforming, b) encouraging poor practices, c) simply disappointing or d) giving unnecessary ammunition to those who would advocate a less concerned, more hedonistic approach to our planet's precious resources.
Green is usually one heck of a good thing. But you still need to look at each and every aspect of it on what can be some quite complex interactions and/or merits before shoving any old stuff out in its name.
There are simply too many who see it only as the colour of money or the rally of a 'ban-wagon', and will use it for less noble ends than the saving of this planet.
And if as the efforts of the organisations above would suggest, and as echoed by our government and media such as the BBC, this is the greatest challenge we face as a race, then it surely deserves to be taken a lot more seriously, to the highest standards of journalistic challenge, at every level.
At the moment too much is being pumped out as an '... and finally', by the most junior of staff, and the consequent tone, lack of investigation and/or frequent errors are eroding the good and necessary works on the much bigger picture.
Monday, December 03, 2007
I could be RSS'd
You might not know it but, with luck, this blog is now strangely different.
As a consequence of getting in a tangle trying to log on to another site 'feed' (this word crops up a lot... and I am still not much the wiser), I ended up clicking a bunch of things and....
...the long and short of it is that I think I have now added an RSS 'feed' option via 'Feedburner' to by blog.
What's that mean? Well, to be honest I have currently no blooming idea.
I think what it means that if you like what you see and read here, and want to come back, you can click on something that makes it easier. It may even mean you get told when a post goes up, which means several a day.
Oops.
It's OK.... because I'm worth it:)
There is also a small Brazilian woodland's worth of print out on my desk to read in bed tonight as there were scores of links to instructions to do new stuff - all with odd names - that may make the experience better all round. So I guess I'll be playing a while. Icons. Twiddly bits. Audio. Video. Stats.
And of course between my Mac and PC and Safari and IE and Firefox, it all looks totally different in each browser. I can see a little button up there now on one at least (though not, oddly, FireFox, who are Google/Blogger chums), which is nice.
Hope it works out. For the best. For all of us.
Moments from a blog
While Junkk.com devotes itself to the unremittingly positive and 'nice', this blog at least affords me the luxury of having a bit of a rant and, on occasion, a go.
I really must restrain myself. But, I'd like to think, there is some justification inasmuch as I am usually only keen to pop some pompous bubble, usually being inflated with hot air by one (or collection of same) who seems to 'know' what's good for us. Or, worse, is so convinced that what some others are doing is not, see it as their mission to stop 'em. I guess there are a few areas where a ban sadly is the only recourse, but I'd really like to think we have exhausted all other options first before reaching for the speed dial to one's PR, who in turn reaches for the speed dial to their favourite Editor to launch a 'reporter' off on a slow news day. And put a few folk making stuff out of a job.
But just as I used to envy my mates at uni who got all the girls by coming all over bomb banning, whilst I had this small niggle that maybe greeting the Russians with a Lee Enfield might not quite be the best deterrent of first effectiveness, so I must confess to thinking how blooming easy it would be just to have at anything that comes across my sights, and do so from the cosy cover of it being, or even just looking, 'green'...ish. Or not even having to concern oneself with any alternatives or, if one has, then whether these really are effective anyway.
This struck me as I was working through the Telegraph blogs. What fun it would be to just let rip, and the heck with whether it's fair or justified or anything other than a good way to daub myself in an arboreal hue and bask in the approbation of half of Islington, Dorset or the South Cotswolds (well, the bits not scraping a living in real jobs, that is).
Just look what I could do (I've left out the political ones, though even a few here offer pickings of richness:
Adding elegance to a room - Fireplaces, huh? That would be the dirty great hole up which a vast amount of the central heating escapes?
Confessions of a fake blonde - How much peroxide, in how many bottles, from how many trips... get consumed to look like a BBC news reader?
A portrait's progress - 'Squeezed in a trip to South Africa'. As you do.
I could go on (and do the same for all the rest), but I think I'm coming over all Marvin (it's a HitchHiker's Guide thing), and really can't be bothered.
At least most would have got a comment. Which rather begs the question as to what these types do... and who pays them. I guess it's the travel ads.
I really must restrain myself. But, I'd like to think, there is some justification inasmuch as I am usually only keen to pop some pompous bubble, usually being inflated with hot air by one (or collection of same) who seems to 'know' what's good for us. Or, worse, is so convinced that what some others are doing is not, see it as their mission to stop 'em. I guess there are a few areas where a ban sadly is the only recourse, but I'd really like to think we have exhausted all other options first before reaching for the speed dial to one's PR, who in turn reaches for the speed dial to their favourite Editor to launch a 'reporter' off on a slow news day. And put a few folk making stuff out of a job.
But just as I used to envy my mates at uni who got all the girls by coming all over bomb banning, whilst I had this small niggle that maybe greeting the Russians with a Lee Enfield might not quite be the best deterrent of first effectiveness, so I must confess to thinking how blooming easy it would be just to have at anything that comes across my sights, and do so from the cosy cover of it being, or even just looking, 'green'...ish. Or not even having to concern oneself with any alternatives or, if one has, then whether these really are effective anyway.
This struck me as I was working through the Telegraph blogs. What fun it would be to just let rip, and the heck with whether it's fair or justified or anything other than a good way to daub myself in an arboreal hue and bask in the approbation of half of Islington, Dorset or the South Cotswolds (well, the bits not scraping a living in real jobs, that is).
Just look what I could do (I've left out the political ones, though even a few here offer pickings of richness:
Adding elegance to a room - Fireplaces, huh? That would be the dirty great hole up which a vast amount of the central heating escapes?
Confessions of a fake blonde - How much peroxide, in how many bottles, from how many trips... get consumed to look like a BBC news reader?
A portrait's progress - 'Squeezed in a trip to South Africa'. As you do.
I could go on (and do the same for all the rest), but I think I'm coming over all Marvin (it's a HitchHiker's Guide thing), and really can't be bothered.
At least most would have got a comment. Which rather begs the question as to what these types do... and who pays them. I guess it's the travel ads.
There's no business...
... like snow business: Mad fer it – we’re going skiing in a £31m shed
As a genuine question, as I really have no clue as to the answer, I was wondering how these things compared in terms of carbon whatevers?
Yes, getting a family to the ski slopes has a consequence (snow cannon point noted) , but I guess so does running a dirty great big chiller too... 24/7, 365/365?
And if the numbers are not optimal... who gave planning permission? I'd hope not some LA type who is trying to save the planet with bi-weekly collections.
As a genuine question, as I really have no clue as to the answer, I was wondering how these things compared in terms of carbon whatevers?
Yes, getting a family to the ski slopes has a consequence (snow cannon point noted) , but I guess so does running a dirty great big chiller too... 24/7, 365/365?
And if the numbers are not optimal... who gave planning permission? I'd hope not some LA type who is trying to save the planet with bi-weekly collections.
In politics, a week is a long time. Ten years, however...
I was going to let this pass, but having watched yet another pol dredge for tushtissue into distant history, I simply cannot fail to pass comment.
On the matter of cancer care Alan Johnson, Minister for something or other (there are so many doing so little in so short a time before being 'reassigned' I can't keep up), was on BBC Breakfast this morning trumpeting some 'new' 'initiative' to 'resolve' some woeful state of service provision. And somehow, in a blizzard of stats he was allowed to refer us back to .... the previous administration.
My kids are now eleven.
So for over a decade they have 'moved on', 'looked at' and 'learned from' a lot.
I can't quite figure out how this is a feat that seems so far to have escaped the government who have been in power for the same period, and seems top have decided the best defence is to come out with such utter tripe to justify the hiring of extra hundreds of thousands (articles in the papers at the weekend on just how much our pensions equate to those of MPs (hint: not favourably), and how much of our local taxes goes to the pensions of public service employees) and the blowing of bazillions that have achieved diddly squat.
To put just one area in context as we're equating things with my kids: just 5 years ago they would have been in the world top 3 for literacy. Now, 5 years later and after 10 years of this administration, we're at 15th (source: Daily Mail. I'll live with 'em for facts).
The only mystery to me is how they keep getting away with this for so long, and what motivations are actually still serving to get even the most manipulable examples of the voting public, even those on the juiciest end of the public trough, still seem to plonk their x on the names of such numpties.
On the matter of cancer care Alan Johnson, Minister for something or other (there are so many doing so little in so short a time before being 'reassigned' I can't keep up), was on BBC Breakfast this morning trumpeting some 'new' 'initiative' to 'resolve' some woeful state of service provision. And somehow, in a blizzard of stats he was allowed to refer us back to .... the previous administration.
My kids are now eleven.
So for over a decade they have 'moved on', 'looked at' and 'learned from' a lot.
I can't quite figure out how this is a feat that seems so far to have escaped the government who have been in power for the same period, and seems top have decided the best defence is to come out with such utter tripe to justify the hiring of extra hundreds of thousands (articles in the papers at the weekend on just how much our pensions equate to those of MPs (hint: not favourably), and how much of our local taxes goes to the pensions of public service employees) and the blowing of bazillions that have achieved diddly squat.
To put just one area in context as we're equating things with my kids: just 5 years ago they would have been in the world top 3 for literacy. Now, 5 years later and after 10 years of this administration, we're at 15th (source: Daily Mail. I'll live with 'em for facts).
The only mystery to me is how they keep getting away with this for so long, and what motivations are actually still serving to get even the most manipulable examples of the voting public, even those on the juiciest end of the public trough, still seem to plonk their x on the names of such numpties.
EVENT - I'm dreaming of a Green Christmas - London Science Museum Dana Centre
A bit last minute, but for any in or near London here's one I can reccomend:
MONTH - December
FIELD: Enviro, Science, Awareness
WHEN: Tomorrow, Dec 4 (corrected - tx Dave), 7-8.30pm
WHAT: Dreaming of a Green Christmas?
WHAT... MORE?: A few more key details
WHERE: Exhibition Road, London, SW7 2DD
WHO: Well, yours truly for one!
HOW: It's free. But you need to book.
URL: Link. Call 020 7942 4040 or e-mail tickets@danacentre.org.uk
COMMENTS: We went last year. It was fun and informative. And guess what... Junkk Male Peter will be going again, with a bunch of new stuff to show off! Including his famous Green Santa outfit.
MONTH - December
FIELD: Enviro, Science, Awareness
WHEN: Tomorrow, Dec 4 (corrected - tx Dave), 7-8.30pm
WHAT: Dreaming of a Green Christmas?
WHAT... MORE?: A few more key details
WHERE: Exhibition Road, London, SW7 2DD
WHO: Well, yours truly for one!
HOW: It's free. But you need to book.
URL: Link. Call 020 7942 4040 or e-mail tickets@danacentre.org.uk
COMMENTS: We went last year. It was fun and informative. And guess what... Junkk Male Peter will be going again, with a bunch of new stuff to show off! Including his famous Green Santa outfit.
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Holding up mirrors
I am about to start my Sunday Trawl of the papers..Before I click on a single article.I just wanted to share the first thing that popped up in front of me.
I have not yet opened it, so it may be a critical appraisal. Or maybe yet another uncontradictory though unusual complement to editorial elsewhere on climate change. Let's see.
The Observer - 'Would madam care to taste the cloud juice?'
You read it here first... well, second, well...
Just make sure you always read this with eyebrow aware of the origins.
CBS Seeking 'Irreverent,' 'Hip' Journalist for Eco-Beat (No Knowledge Required)
But facts are facts.
I just have to say that, while minor, this really does offer an unfortunate insight into how climate change is viewed and treated by those tasked with sharing it with the general public. Actually, It is the use of the word 'journalist' that throws one. One suspects this is really an empty talking head that spouts the script provided. What is more of relevance is what lies behind those words supplied.
But it all serves up a tasty morsel to those who cast nasturtiums. And in this I am one. The issue of climate is too serious not to entrust to those who care about dealing with it professionally. You can be irreverent and hip, but you should have a pretty good grasp of what's going on... or what is not yet known.
Abilities all to sadly lacking in most I see spouting forth, doubtless packing their Speedos for Bali.
CBS Seeking 'Irreverent,' 'Hip' Journalist for Eco-Beat (No Knowledge Required)
But facts are facts.
I just have to say that, while minor, this really does offer an unfortunate insight into how climate change is viewed and treated by those tasked with sharing it with the general public. Actually, It is the use of the word 'journalist' that throws one. One suspects this is really an empty talking head that spouts the script provided. What is more of relevance is what lies behind those words supplied.
But it all serves up a tasty morsel to those who cast nasturtiums. And in this I am one. The issue of climate is too serious not to entrust to those who care about dealing with it professionally. You can be irreverent and hip, but you should have a pretty good grasp of what's going on... or what is not yet known.
Abilities all to sadly lacking in most I see spouting forth, doubtless packing their Speedos for Bali.
A lot of space
Not exactly a priority in the great scheme of things, but I am watching the BBC news and something has struck me.
While I appreciate the dilemma presented by space travel between scientific investigation and the vast carbon footprint it lays down, I cannot for the life of me comprehend why the national broadcaster would be so actively promoting space tourism in all its forms.
Other than the dubious justification of using private money to fund public works (like rich hunters getting to kill whatever they fancy to support conservation), there seems to me no other way to describe this activity other than sticking a rich bozo atop a column of greenhouse gasses to have a Kodak moment.
Yet it warrants a visit to NASA to promote to those of us who will never afford it, even if we feel the urge. Odd.
While I appreciate the dilemma presented by space travel between scientific investigation and the vast carbon footprint it lays down, I cannot for the life of me comprehend why the national broadcaster would be so actively promoting space tourism in all its forms.
Other than the dubious justification of using private money to fund public works (like rich hunters getting to kill whatever they fancy to support conservation), there seems to me no other way to describe this activity other than sticking a rich bozo atop a column of greenhouse gasses to have a Kodak moment.
Yet it warrants a visit to NASA to promote to those of us who will never afford it, even if we feel the urge. Odd.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Sorely Missed: *
You can pop in the appropriate noun here: *
Newsnight: Stern climate questions
As was in Brussels I obviously did miss it. But maybe not much as I interpret post 100.
In the hands of our media and those in authority tasked to shape our futures, this Bali effort is looking more and more of a joke as it approaches.
God help us if they find Maddie's teddy bear at the same time as any worthwhile consensus or call for action is broadcast. I know what our beleaguered PM will rush to the studios to comment upon first.
A week may be a long time in politics. But it seems an hour can be an eternity when it comes to weighing priorities: the end of the human race, versus the travails of some individuals who are just part of it.
Newsnight: Stern climate questions
As was in Brussels I obviously did miss it. But maybe not much as I interpret post 100.
In the hands of our media and those in authority tasked to shape our futures, this Bali effort is looking more and more of a joke as it approaches.
God help us if they find Maddie's teddy bear at the same time as any worthwhile consensus or call for action is broadcast. I know what our beleaguered PM will rush to the studios to comment upon first.
A week may be a long time in politics. But it seems an hour can be an eternity when it comes to weighing priorities: the end of the human race, versus the travails of some individuals who are just part of it.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Brussels Sprouts
Well, I’m back from sunny (make that grey and wet) Brussels, having attended ‘Caps & Closures 2007’.It really is too early to answer the question I was asked more than once at the end: ‘Was it worth it?’
To put that in context, it was often preceded by another that I had posed to me at the beginning: ‘What are you doing here?’
My answer to both was/is the same: ‘I’ll let you know when the cheque clears’.
All it takes is one. But when I walked in, saw the format and the presentation slide document... I almost turned straight around to hit the bars (which are pretty good).
It’s hard to be all things to all people, and when you are at the annual conference of those on the planet whose life revolves around the bits that top bottles and jars, you pretty much know what to expect, but there were some unpleasant surprises.
First up, over the majority of the two days we were there to be talked at, and mainly by folk who had paid to give a 30 minute pitch to those who had paid to sit and listen to them. And I have to say that when I was on the nth ‘nozzle cleaning design’ I was glazing over a tad. Hence I was tasked with meeting and pitching to as many relevant folk as possible at the coffee break, lunch and post event.
I was also up against a bunch of guys who all knew each other, knew their topic backwards, thought of little else… and wore suits as opposed to shirts emblazoned with ‘Junkk.com – home of the award-winning eco-cap design, the RE:tie’, and carry laptops and not pink Vac:Sacs.
Still… nothing ventured…
Actually, I ended up jotting down a lot of useful stuff to help enhance my pitch for the concept once back and can get in a room with those who can make strategic decisions… and sign cheques. Because, sadly, there were few… very few… of such folk there.
That said I do believe there were several who, if not in such positions themselves, were at least in pretty close, if only round the water cooler. And, best yet, for a collection of rather literal, often jaded representatives of a $400Billion industry who get pitched to an awful lot by crackpot inventors, all went from impatient cynicism to highly complimentary approval in the space of my elevator pitch (usually on a sofa in the lobby – maybe I should have tried the lift, it would be more private!).
I guess it was summed up by the feedback from a representative of Coca-Cola (who, sadly, use no packs that have a closure that can evolve into a RE:tie) who said he’d seen a lot, and this was one the best innovations he’d seen. But then I was also cautioned about the nature of the indus... beast I am trying to influence. You don’t easily steer something that cranks out units in the billions daily, and once you apply the corporate system to the mix you are talking many years for even the best to work through to production.
So a lot ahead still, but a good set of seeds have been sown and, if I may be slightly optimistic, have already shown signs of germinating.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Methane from a very unexpected source
Here's another source of methane (one of the most potent of the greenhouse gases) that needs to be taken into account in any climate model. It seems that certain shrubs (woody) plants themselves actually produce methane by some, as yet, unexplained mechanism, as reported in RSC Chemistry World.
Fortunately it would appear that herbaceous plants don't emit methane, but upland wooded areas may well yet turn out to be a source of at least some of the naturally occurring methane in the earth's atmosphere.
Fortunately it would appear that herbaceous plants don't emit methane, but upland wooded areas may well yet turn out to be a source of at least some of the naturally occurring methane in the earth's atmosphere.
Fickle weather
One of the dire warnings issued by climatologists was that the likelihood and frequency of really nasty hurricanes would increase as global warming took hold. But the 2007 weather has, of course, been totally fickle, and refused to play ball. As the USA's 2007 hurricane season draws to a close, the country has escaped almost entirely unscathed (whilst Mexico and Central America have taken the brunt of the major storms this season).
Anybody fancy a little wager that this first fact will be seized upon by the BOFDi brigade as more evidence that global warming is not taking place?
Anybody fancy a little wager that this first fact will be seized upon by the BOFDi brigade as more evidence that global warming is not taking place?
More windmills for Don Quixote to tilt at?
Spain is going to invest in a project to develop vast windfarms in order to reduce its dependence on natural gas and coal fired power stations. As reported in today's Telegraph.
"The Ministry of Industry plans to announce over the next few weeks its more detailed plans to erect tens of thousands of pylons.
This will require a further investment of about €45,000m in order to produce 107.845 MW of electricity by the year 2030. The ambitious scheme involves tripling wind power in order to reduce Spain's dependency on foreign suppliers of gas (North Africa) and to reduce pollution."
"The Ministry of Industry plans to announce over the next few weeks its more detailed plans to erect tens of thousands of pylons.
This will require a further investment of about €45,000m in order to produce 107.845 MW of electricity by the year 2030. The ambitious scheme involves tripling wind power in order to reduce Spain's dependency on foreign suppliers of gas (North Africa) and to reduce pollution."
The overall plan is to produce up to 49% of energy requirements from renewables by 2030. My bet is that Spain will succeed while here in the UK we will still not even be at the 20% target set for 2020, even when we get to 2030.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Labour party donations
As ever, the inimitable genius that is Matt of the Daily Telegraph manages to sum up the whole sorry mess in a single amusing cartoon.
Coming on top of the cash for questions affair and more recently the missing HMRC data files, it looks as if this could create more than a few ripples.
Here's the Telegraph's take on the story.
The Guardian's take is worth a look too, as is this from The Times.
In fact, the more this story unfolds, it looks as if we may well see a few more heads rolling before long.
Addendum 29/11/07:
Hmmmm, looks like the plot is thickening already. See this from this mornings Guardian Unlimited. I find it extremely odd that the party's treasurer (who also just happens to be 'Harridan' Harman's husband; and of course, 'Harridan' herself did accept a donation via such a 'conduit' "in good faith") claims to know absolutely nothing about the use of 'conduits' for the acceptance of donations. On top of that they had one of the so called 'conduits' on Radio 5 this morning; a builder from the NE by the name of Ray Ruddock. What is very interesting is that the labour party donations record shows that he has paid in some £200,000 but he claimed he was only aware of handing over some £80,000 in donations.
Another interesting snippet via Guido Fawkes. This one is going to run and run!
Oh, check out Matt's cartoon today in the Telegraph too. Brilliant!
Whitehall could save millions on offices
There's that special word again, 'could'. Isn't it amazing how often it crops up in headlines?
However, in this case, as reported on epolitix.com, I suspect that they probably couldn't. Why? Because they would set up a special project, staffed by innumerable representatives of the government's best super-pensioned, unaccountable, jobs-worth, empty-suited and highly paid staff (not counting the super expensive consultants that they would undoubtedly call in for help). This little lot would almost certainly blow more in undertaking the project than it could ever save.
(Oh dear, I've just used the 'could' word myself; I must slap myself on the wrist.)
However, in this case, as reported on epolitix.com, I suspect that they probably couldn't. Why? Because they would set up a special project, staffed by innumerable representatives of the government's best super-pensioned, unaccountable, jobs-worth, empty-suited and highly paid staff (not counting the super expensive consultants that they would undoubtedly call in for help). This little lot would almost certainly blow more in undertaking the project than it could ever save.
(Oh dear, I've just used the 'could' word myself; I must slap myself on the wrist.)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)