Those are the four groupings of consumer types on a green adoption curve, according to research undertaken by Starcom MediaVest Group and reported in Marketing Week.
"Passionates, comprise 10% of the population and are highly motivated - the only group of people who regularly campaign, blog and boycott." - they also tend be be somewhat uncompromising.
"Dutifuls make up 24% of adults; they are enthusiastic without being political; they aspire to being greener and more ethical, often seeing it as a signifier of social status."
"Followers are the majority of the population at 41%. They tend to be more green than ethical and they feel that they ought to get more involved but are often not sure how to."
"The Uninvolved, 25% of the population, are more apathetic than actively anti-green, but have nevertheless formed a powerful set of barriers to adoption."
With such a wide and diverse set of consumer groups, no wonder it is so difficult to know just how to position any brand communication!
Well worth a browse.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
CATEGORY - Media Wires
There are a variety of non-enviro but peripheral and relevant products and services I use in the cause of Junkk.com.
So as I learn, discover, fail or find out stuff maybe worth sharing, so I will pop it up.
Hence here is a (soon to be, as I am reminded) growing list of places to go to post a PR story that may get picked up.
These are some places journalists may go to find new content, and most are free.
Hey, you never know!
Daryl Wilcox Publishing - paid - useful free newsletters
Google news
So as I learn, discover, fail or find out stuff maybe worth sharing, so I will pop it up.
Hence here is a (soon to be, as I am reminded) growing list of places to go to post a PR story that may get picked up.
These are some places journalists may go to find new content, and most are free.
Hey, you never know!
Google news
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Careful what you go 'a wanting..
A very interesting piece on packaging: Shoppers want less packaging
While much is in there (or the links), especially the inherent contradictions and cultural differences, I felt it worth asking for more to be spelled out.
As it pertains to an ongoing investigation I am conducting, and acknowledging the explanations in the piece above, what might make the packaging you feature in the picture overprotective?
In the face of the massive, negative-PR anti-packaging onslaughts, I am having trouble reconciling why the producers (in this case) or brands and/or retailers would still be going to the trouble and expense without good reason(s).
I am keen to find out what they might be.
While much is in there (or the links), especially the inherent contradictions and cultural differences, I felt it worth asking for more to be spelled out.
As it pertains to an ongoing investigation I am conducting, and acknowledging the explanations in the piece above, what might make the packaging you feature in the picture overprotective?
In the face of the massive, negative-PR anti-packaging onslaughts, I am having trouble reconciling why the producers (in this case) or brands and/or retailers would still be going to the trouble and expense without good reason(s).
I am keen to find out what they might be.
The sub 100 club
Well, the sub 110 club really, as only the Bluemotion is actually less than 100g/km in terms of CO2 emissions. Nevertheless, it's quite a useful summary of the lowest emission vehicles that are available, from MotorTorque.
And all are VED and Con Charge exempt!
And all are VED and Con Charge exempt!
NEWS/Commercial PR - one good turn deserves a mention!
There's so little not to like about this I just had to rush it out as soon as I heard: The Pedalite.It appeals on just so many levels.
As an engineer I can't help but admire the innovative concept for its simplicity and efficiency. Remember those old generator jobs that had a wheel being rubbed against the tyre? Any hill and you may have had light, but you were soon running out of puff! This really gets the rotational energy to light superbly.
It's also a critical safety aid. I have some issues about the claims being made for getting kids on bikes. This won't address all of them, but at least it helps my fight with mine trying to get them in high-vis torso and arm bands as they are not 'cool'.
A big thumbs up from here. I look forward to doing a full on-site re:view soon.
PR as supplied, with edits and tweaks:
Add side lighting to bikes to eliminate cycling accidents urges Tony Doyle former World Champion Cyclist
Cycling safety campaigner and former World Champion cyclist, Tony Doyle, MBE, urges cyclists to add side lighting to their bikes, following a report this week by Transport for London stating that more than one London rider is involved in a serious cycling accident every day, with three out of four of these accidents taking place at road junctions, where cyclists cannot be seen from the side (Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents).
Statistics also revealed that:
· 156 cyclists had been killed in London in the past 10 years
· More than 34,000 people were involved in bicycle accidents reported to the Met between 1996 and 2006
· The numbers involved in serious accidents fell from 566 in 1997 to 373 in 2006
· The number of slight accidents fell from 3,852 to 2,566 in 2006
The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, has just announced a £500m investment in a new network of quick, simple, and safe routes for cyclists, which will provide 900km of safer routes through the capital. A new central London bike hire scheme will also be launched, with 6,000 bikes available every 300 metres [not quite sure about this stat!? - Ed].
Tony Doyle comments, “The TFL’s investment in cycling is brilliant news for cyclists, however, we all need to be aware of the safety issues for cyclists. The increased popularity of cyclists in recent years has also seen a 30% rise in deaths of cyclists on the road since 2002 and with 75% of accidents happening at road junctions, side lighting should be seen to be as important as wearing a helmet in terms of keeping cyclists safe.”
With more cars on the roads than ever before, 48% of cyclists feel unsafe on the roads, according to research of 450 cyclists conducted at the National Cycle show in October 2007 by Pedalite International Ltd. 68% of cyclists believe that motorists came too close to them and over half were worried that they would not be seen in the evenings by motorists (51%). One in five people felt that there was a lack of cycle lanes to ensure their safety, despite the fact that many more cycle lanes have been created over the past few years in major UK cities.
Tony’s top tips for cycling safety are:
* Cyclists need to be as visible as possible on the road and should wear reflective clothing at all times
* Never cycle without a helmet, even on the shortest of distances
* Give your bike a regular bike service to ensure its on road safety
* Pump up your tyres and carry additional batteries for your front and rear lights
* Add reliable side lighting such as battery-free 360 visibility Pedalites* which provide always-on lighting to ensure they can be seen clearly by motorists
*Pedalite International Ltd offers unique 360 degree visibility battery-free pedal lights that improve cycling safety. Pedalites are powered by cycling energy which is harvested and stored enabling the lights to stay on for up to five minutes after the pedalling stops, such as when the cyclist is freewheeling or waiting at a junction. Motorists can see bikes fitted with Pedalites from up to 1km away and from any angle, including the side.
The lights cost £34.99 from Evans, Leisure Lake Bikes and they can be purchased online from the makers
To read more about Pedalite International’s SHE campaign please go here.
I'm sorry, but...
... this from our national broadcaster: Space planes 'to meet big demand'
Only without a peep about the stuff that pops out the back end of these rich-tourist efforts? Meanwhile, main news, our supermarket heads are all getting hybrids. That'll sort it.
Er....
In case I have missed something, I have been moved to ask:
Dear Mr. Amos,
I know there's a boldy-going, boundary-pushing aspect to man's evolution that needs to be acknowledged in all things innovative, and commerce often funds science. But in light of our being told we need to deal with emissions pronto to stabilise the only world we currently have to live on, just what are the consequences of these things, not just in terms of what they punt out, but the messages they send (ie: rich OK in space 5-up on a rocket... poor mustn't go to Majorca 200-up on EasyJet). What next, a promo for a Prius by Al Gore and Leonardo from space, with a BBC crew to broadcast? It does seem that some 'pioneers' of commercial space profit-making are getting, if you will excuse the pun, a rather easy, unchallenged, easy ride. Yes these things exist, are legally permitted to, if not encouraged. And are waaaay cool. But would not some questions be appropriate to put things in some context in light of the messages we the public are be served up daily on thrift and reduction in emissions? Any facts to clarify?
The author has already kindly, and promptly, replied, in a fair manner:
There are several issues here; and they are very reasonable questions which should be asked (However, I set out to write a technical article, not a socio-political one). Robert Laine addresses some of them in his lecture which you can view online if you click the webcast link in the right-hand navigation. For what it is worth, the rocket industry calls LOX-CH4 a "green propellant". But by green they are speaking relative to their usual propellants. It requires a lot of energy to first make hydrogen and then keep it chilled to the liquid state. Methane by comparison is much easier to handle. There are some special purpose fuels, too, which are pretty unpleasant. These are the so-called hypergolic fuels such as hydrazine which you will have heard about concerning the recent US spy satellite that was shot down. Nasty stuff.
However I do still have concerns, and especially do not feel that it is any longer adequate that media, especially one as major as the BBC, divorce one area of reporting from another. It is hard to imagine a piece on plastic that addresses only the facts without some tilt towards it's impact on the environment. Hence I have written back:
Thank you for taking the time to reply. Plus the info and link.
I appreciate your 'patch', but we are sadly moving into a new era where what one does in one area can (and maybe should) have a bearing what is going down elsewhere, especially as it is related. Take it from me! I am a creator of 'things' (engineer, designer and writer). But where once I simply worked on the basis of 'can this be done?' and embark on making it so, my environmental involvements now bring a terrible curse to the inventive soul; so I now find myself often constrained by having to ask: 'should it be done?'. And it's hard, when you have a good, new idea, to find that it may actually impose an environmental burden in its manufacture and use that goes beyond ego or paying the rent. But if (and as one who subscribes currently to 'Probably man-worsened climate change, so just in case maybe we should do what we can now') there is a global issue being faced that needs addressing by all, and quick, some of the old rules and boundaries might need to be re-assessed.
And there are a lot in the mix here, from governments to corporations to the media to the individual. And more than a few are complicit in bearing messages that, depending on the messenger, can be mixed at best. So, as a consumer I do find an eyebrow gets cranked when I see a piece in, say, the Guardian, moaning about air travel or 4x4s, yet right next door is an ad for a Range Rover or weekend break in the Maldives. The BBC is lucky in that it does not have such commercial pressures to weigh, but I do confess to getting cranky when I see the Breakfast News crew trotting out something on plastic bags as if it were the return of Satan, and then cutting to some guy on an Arctic ice flow saying it's all to save global warming that he and the guys flew up there.
So, on the one side I, like any red-blooded male (or like-minded laydee) love to hear of the latest gizmo, not just because I might want one but just to appreciate all that it took to think it up and make it. And what's not to like about space travel? If we are screwed down here, maybe we do need to keep on looking to the stars as the next venue we can reach out to... and then pollute with our messy footprints.
I guess I just find that such as Sir. B et al get a lot of promo for what is a) pretty elitist and b) pretty hard to justify (unless the 'tourists' swap their Kodak moment for a bit of weightless experimenting while up there (and I don't mean the 60 mile high club), especially when the main motivation seems to be money. The bio 7'one out of 4'7 was another, but that PR kinda backfired I feel, especially when folk started trying to assess how many acres of nuts it would take to get across the Atlantic. That's when these things do not help, as they weaken the cases for more moderate advocacies by bringing opposing extremes to the fore.
No problem with innovation, especially of the 'green' variety, but the enviROI has to be brought front and centre. All I now care about is that what we put in place for the future makes my kids' chances of a livable planet better than currently advised... mainly by such as the BBC. Can't have it all ways anymore. Or at least, not if we are facing 'the biggest threat.. yadayada...' The Corporation does have a duty more than most news media, but why do I feel that even if proof positive of man-made adverse climate change was released, if Macca did an OJ the entire building would clear the airwaves scrambling to bring live footage from the nearest helicopter to bring us his progress, if maybe tsk-tsk'in that he was in an SUV?
Interesting point on the energy costs of getting H2 into a tank. All we tend to hear are paeans to the glass of water that falls from Arnie's Hummer or Sir Stuart Rose's BMW 7-series. I love the notion behind it all, but again remain interested more in whether it is credible as a resource to actually reduce emissions, or is more a rich person's toy dressed up as green.
Anyway, I appreciate the feedback. But maybe you can see some merit in my point about the role national broadcaster can and should play in keeping messages consistent and audience sensitive in the face of such a major issue as this.
Addendum -
BBC - Robots fly into Antarctic skies - A a step in the right direction? But what's the betting a bunch of film crews will be flying up there to report on it?
Only without a peep about the stuff that pops out the back end of these rich-tourist efforts? Meanwhile, main news, our supermarket heads are all getting hybrids. That'll sort it.
Er....
In case I have missed something, I have been moved to ask:
Dear Mr. Amos,
I know there's a boldy-going, boundary-pushing aspect to man's evolution that needs to be acknowledged in all things innovative, and commerce often funds science. But in light of our being told we need to deal with emissions pronto to stabilise the only world we currently have to live on, just what are the consequences of these things, not just in terms of what they punt out, but the messages they send (ie: rich OK in space 5-up on a rocket... poor mustn't go to Majorca 200-up on EasyJet). What next, a promo for a Prius by Al Gore and Leonardo from space, with a BBC crew to broadcast? It does seem that some 'pioneers' of commercial space profit-making are getting, if you will excuse the pun, a rather easy, unchallenged, easy ride. Yes these things exist, are legally permitted to, if not encouraged. And are waaaay cool. But would not some questions be appropriate to put things in some context in light of the messages we the public are be served up daily on thrift and reduction in emissions? Any facts to clarify?
The author has already kindly, and promptly, replied, in a fair manner:
There are several issues here; and they are very reasonable questions which should be asked (However, I set out to write a technical article, not a socio-political one). Robert Laine addresses some of them in his lecture which you can view online if you click the webcast link in the right-hand navigation. For what it is worth, the rocket industry calls LOX-CH4 a "green propellant". But by green they are speaking relative to their usual propellants. It requires a lot of energy to first make hydrogen and then keep it chilled to the liquid state. Methane by comparison is much easier to handle. There are some special purpose fuels, too, which are pretty unpleasant. These are the so-called hypergolic fuels such as hydrazine which you will have heard about concerning the recent US spy satellite that was shot down. Nasty stuff.
However I do still have concerns, and especially do not feel that it is any longer adequate that media, especially one as major as the BBC, divorce one area of reporting from another. It is hard to imagine a piece on plastic that addresses only the facts without some tilt towards it's impact on the environment. Hence I have written back:
Thank you for taking the time to reply. Plus the info and link.
I appreciate your 'patch', but we are sadly moving into a new era where what one does in one area can (and maybe should) have a bearing what is going down elsewhere, especially as it is related. Take it from me! I am a creator of 'things' (engineer, designer and writer). But where once I simply worked on the basis of 'can this be done?' and embark on making it so, my environmental involvements now bring a terrible curse to the inventive soul; so I now find myself often constrained by having to ask: 'should it be done?'. And it's hard, when you have a good, new idea, to find that it may actually impose an environmental burden in its manufacture and use that goes beyond ego or paying the rent. But if (and as one who subscribes currently to 'Probably man-worsened climate change, so just in case maybe we should do what we can now') there is a global issue being faced that needs addressing by all, and quick, some of the old rules and boundaries might need to be re-assessed.
And there are a lot in the mix here, from governments to corporations to the media to the individual. And more than a few are complicit in bearing messages that, depending on the messenger, can be mixed at best. So, as a consumer I do find an eyebrow gets cranked when I see a piece in, say, the Guardian, moaning about air travel or 4x4s, yet right next door is an ad for a Range Rover or weekend break in the Maldives. The BBC is lucky in that it does not have such commercial pressures to weigh, but I do confess to getting cranky when I see the Breakfast News crew trotting out something on plastic bags as if it were the return of Satan, and then cutting to some guy on an Arctic ice flow saying it's all to save global warming that he and the guys flew up there.
So, on the one side I, like any red-blooded male (or like-minded laydee) love to hear of the latest gizmo, not just because I might want one but just to appreciate all that it took to think it up and make it. And what's not to like about space travel? If we are screwed down here, maybe we do need to keep on looking to the stars as the next venue we can reach out to... and then pollute with our messy footprints.
I guess I just find that such as Sir. B et al get a lot of promo for what is a) pretty elitist and b) pretty hard to justify (unless the 'tourists' swap their Kodak moment for a bit of weightless experimenting while up there (and I don't mean the 60 mile high club), especially when the main motivation seems to be money. The bio 7'one out of 4'7 was another, but that PR kinda backfired I feel, especially when folk started trying to assess how many acres of nuts it would take to get across the Atlantic. That's when these things do not help, as they weaken the cases for more moderate advocacies by bringing opposing extremes to the fore.
No problem with innovation, especially of the 'green' variety, but the enviROI has to be brought front and centre. All I now care about is that what we put in place for the future makes my kids' chances of a livable planet better than currently advised... mainly by such as the BBC. Can't have it all ways anymore. Or at least, not if we are facing 'the biggest threat.. yadayada...' The Corporation does have a duty more than most news media, but why do I feel that even if proof positive of man-made adverse climate change was released, if Macca did an OJ the entire building would clear the airwaves scrambling to bring live footage from the nearest helicopter to bring us his progress, if maybe tsk-tsk'in that he was in an SUV?
Interesting point on the energy costs of getting H2 into a tank. All we tend to hear are paeans to the glass of water that falls from Arnie's Hummer or Sir Stuart Rose's BMW 7-series. I love the notion behind it all, but again remain interested more in whether it is credible as a resource to actually reduce emissions, or is more a rich person's toy dressed up as green.
Anyway, I appreciate the feedback. But maybe you can see some merit in my point about the role national broadcaster can and should play in keeping messages consistent and audience sensitive in the face of such a major issue as this.
Addendum -
BBC - Robots fly into Antarctic skies - A a step in the right direction? But what's the betting a bunch of film crews will be flying up there to report on it?
PROF's POSER - Free into who will go?
It's inspired today by this - Battery-powered car on the cards for BMW in bid to cut emissions - which is by no means the first or only such PR outing for an alternative motor fuel/solution.
As all know, my primary concern is the enviROI to such things.
So while I concede that such as electric and hydrogen are most likely to result in fewer emissions from the car where it happens to be, I concern myself more with the total released to the atmosphere, for instance at the point the 'fuel' is created.
I'm just wondering if there is (and there surely must be) any sources that show the relative efficiencies of the various options.
I'm not here (but will be later) so concerned with the overall enviROI of the car (construction, operation/maintenance and disposal all have carbon consequences over lifetime), but simply how the fuel sources stack up in terms of, well... what measure to choose is another key factor.
I'd say the best might be the energy delivered and made available to the tank. As I say, what gets to the wheel is another matter for another time. Though efficiencies in getting miles from a litre of liquid gas or unit of stored electricity are also key.
So... let me kick off with Grams of CO2 per Kilojoule?
Greenbang - Hydrogen highway: won’t somebody think of the water? - May throw up an answer
Funny, I was pondering this only today.
Well, not the water bit as it seemed we have enough of that (but having watched 'V' in the 70's, you should never take such things for granted) and figured it was just going to come back in a cyclical manner, serving merely as part of the energy transfer process.
Plus a quick question to Arnie: why does it have to be a 6/7 litre Hummer? No H2 Civics around, I guess.
As all know, my primary concern is the enviROI to such things.
So while I concede that such as electric and hydrogen are most likely to result in fewer emissions from the car where it happens to be, I concern myself more with the total released to the atmosphere, for instance at the point the 'fuel' is created.
I'm just wondering if there is (and there surely must be) any sources that show the relative efficiencies of the various options.
I'm not here (but will be later) so concerned with the overall enviROI of the car (construction, operation/maintenance and disposal all have carbon consequences over lifetime), but simply how the fuel sources stack up in terms of, well... what measure to choose is another key factor.
I'd say the best might be the energy delivered and made available to the tank. As I say, what gets to the wheel is another matter for another time. Though efficiencies in getting miles from a litre of liquid gas or unit of stored electricity are also key.
So... let me kick off with Grams of CO2 per Kilojoule?
Greenbang - Hydrogen highway: won’t somebody think of the water? - May throw up an answer
Funny, I was pondering this only today.
Well, not the water bit as it seemed we have enough of that (but having watched 'V' in the 70's, you should never take such things for granted) and figured it was just going to come back in a cyclical manner, serving merely as part of the energy transfer process.
Plus a quick question to Arnie: why does it have to be a 6/7 litre Hummer? No H2 Civics around, I guess.
IDEA - Hair today, who knows what tomorrow?
Inspired by this : Dog lovers immortalise pets by turning them into wooly jumpers
As shared by the sniffy blonde (she thought it 'p-EU') and more chilled bouffant on BBC Breakfast News.
A quick Google under 'Dog hair knitting' revealed this is quite prevalent, which just shows how what has been under our noses can end up 'new' when some media say it is.
For copyright reasons I doubt I can show a picture from these publications, but have a gander at our little collection. Bear in mind we throw nothing out... 'just in case'.
That's 4 years of the boys and grandma, who get trimmed at home. Mine we rejected becuase it's just too pepper and salt and looks nasty. The missus doesn't trust us with the clippers, so her tresses are on a barber's floor - waht a waste!
No idea what we'll do with it, if indeed there is anything. But we're looking.
ps: The Other bowl is fluff I collected from our drier. But since we ditched that it has stayed... 'manageable'. Might make good insulation? All you have to do is collect enough. Just saying...
Ahead of our time?
Long, long ago, in fact so long ago it predates our Blogger archive search, I created (and featured) some redesigned ads that I sent to various FMCG retailers and brands to suggest how they could serve the environment better AND maybe even work in the cause of positive marketing for all concerned.
Hence I turned a not very ethical stance on light bulb sales by Tesco into a suggestion for creating a loss leader to get folk into the store. This was about 3 years ago. Nothing much happened (that I noticed)... until now: 1p Energy Saving Bulbs
Oh, well, better late than never!
ps: reading the posts is... illuminating... especially the reasons that may be behind it all, and a debate on the distinction's between low energy, long life and the combo of those that we have banged on about here for some while.
Addendum
Talking Retail - Tesco to sell “green” lightbulbs for a penny - Note the others doing similar deasl, too. Gald I got all mine at Morrisons at £1+!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Picture imperfect?
Call it grumpy Tuesday. End in sight?
The sad thing is I actually agree that there is a need for stirring imagery to motivate. I just am getting weary of a new class of eco-warrior who see it as their job to educate the rest of us in the error of our ways, but seem immune to the slight irony behind much of what they do for fun and/or employment being pretty much what the rest of us are being told we mustn't any more.
And, if true, when there turns out to be sting in the tail (there would appear to be another story about the plight of the village in the picture), it rather sets the more moderate causes back a tad.
I guess I'll get a slapping from the 'but you're missing the point (of flying the world to share this)' crowd, but it all rather smacked of 'them' and 'the rest of us'. Like doco makers who 'do' the Caribbean or dive shop owners in the Red Sea getting their knickers in a twist about plastic bags as the main priority. Hence:
Just wondering, but from what was that picture of Kivalina taken?
Passing plane, fine(ish - but it rather begs who is in it going where and why), but if someone went up in a helicopter I'm guessing that will be ok because 'it's their job', and there was a need to 'raise awareness'.
The way it's going I think the Antarctic will have set up a pub at the airport to handle all the journos popping up there to do a piece to camera about, well, all of this being caused by other folk flying hither and thither... if not to do a piece to or with a camera.
But as our new climate savour TB would say, 'it's not like, really practical for HIM not to fly'.
I guess some just have more green cred to blow than others.
So here's a wheeze for all those in the 'meedya' popping off for a weekend's skiing while the snow holds this Easter: when you're taking your happy snaps off piste, just claim it's for a piece on the effects of global warming.
Seems to work. And nice if you can get it.
The sad thing is I actually agree that there is a need for stirring imagery to motivate. I just am getting weary of a new class of eco-warrior who see it as their job to educate the rest of us in the error of our ways, but seem immune to the slight irony behind much of what they do for fun and/or employment being pretty much what the rest of us are being told we mustn't any more.
And, if true, when there turns out to be sting in the tail (there would appear to be another story about the plight of the village in the picture), it rather sets the more moderate causes back a tad.
I guess I'll get a slapping from the 'but you're missing the point (of flying the world to share this)' crowd, but it all rather smacked of 'them' and 'the rest of us'. Like doco makers who 'do' the Caribbean or dive shop owners in the Red Sea getting their knickers in a twist about plastic bags as the main priority. Hence:
Just wondering, but from what was that picture of Kivalina taken?
Passing plane, fine(ish - but it rather begs who is in it going where and why), but if someone went up in a helicopter I'm guessing that will be ok because 'it's their job', and there was a need to 'raise awareness'.
The way it's going I think the Antarctic will have set up a pub at the airport to handle all the journos popping up there to do a piece to camera about, well, all of this being caused by other folk flying hither and thither... if not to do a piece to or with a camera.
But as our new climate savour TB would say, 'it's not like, really practical for HIM not to fly'.
I guess some just have more green cred to blow than others.
So here's a wheeze for all those in the 'meedya' popping off for a weekend's skiing while the snow holds this Easter: when you're taking your happy snaps off piste, just claim it's for a piece on the effects of global warming.
Seems to work. And nice if you can get it.
NEWS/LOCAL - UK - HR area- Litter pick, Hereford, April 1st
Hmmn. This needs thinking about.
It will work fine on the main site (only all those from overseas using my advised HR9 postcode will get a lot of stuff that may be a tad beyond an easy commute... sorry:() when we start popping stuff up there again.
Here, well, all of you are getting it. For now, if you see a 'LOCAL' heading and the title and/or locale doesn't appeal... please ignore.
But if it does, read on MacDuff!
As taken from their PR:
Some local worthies are planning on doing a litter pick in Hereford city on April 1st. (I am assuming this isn't, well, you know... a leg pull. But check!).
The plan is to meet at M&S in High Town at 5 pm, pick for an hour or so and then retire to the pub.
It's not a substitute for the Council, but a way to bring concerned people together and draw attention to the problem while actually cleaning up some of the mess in the City.
They are looking for a few more volunteers. If you'd like to come along, do let them know. Or if you know of others who would like to come along, please encourage them (as Junkk.com is doing here) to get in touch, via jesse4hereford@gmail.com. They have some kit already but need to know numbers in order to locate more.
Civic share, over and out.
It will work fine on the main site (only all those from overseas using my advised HR9 postcode will get a lot of stuff that may be a tad beyond an easy commute... sorry:() when we start popping stuff up there again.
Here, well, all of you are getting it. For now, if you see a 'LOCAL' heading and the title and/or locale doesn't appeal... please ignore.
But if it does, read on MacDuff!
As taken from their PR:
Some local worthies are planning on doing a litter pick in Hereford city on April 1st. (I am assuming this isn't, well, you know... a leg pull. But check!).
The plan is to meet at M&S in High Town at 5 pm, pick for an hour or so and then retire to the pub.
It's not a substitute for the Council, but a way to bring concerned people together and draw attention to the problem while actually cleaning up some of the mess in the City.
They are looking for a few more volunteers. If you'd like to come along, do let them know. Or if you know of others who would like to come along, please encourage them (as Junkk.com is doing here) to get in touch, via jesse4hereford@gmail.com. They have some kit already but need to know numbers in order to locate more.
Civic share, over and out.
NEWS/Commercial PR - It's what you leave behind that counts
This blog and the site both have categories devoted to the sensitive issue of eco-funerals, so I am happy to add this PR to the blog to kick off as it's in keeping.As received, with a few edits and comments:
Daisy Coffins bury taboos at Retirement Show 2008
Daisy Coffins will be at the Retirement Show will demonstrate how sustainable and attractive natural coffins can be, which are 100% natural made from water hyacinth and banana leafs.
The handcrafted coffins are a real alternative to the main stream wood chip veneer products and are getting noticed by many funeral directors, as more and more requests for sustainable coffins come flooding in.
RE:VIEW - ECOPACK '08
Once you have done a few, you come to realise that there are certain inevitabilities about tradeshows.One is that in the last few hours of the event, a smart, besuited lad or lass (or three) will saunter up and be incredibly concerned about how well it has all gone, and hence interested 'how it was for you?'. It's was only after a a couple I sussed that these were the advance guard for next year's sales.
I suspect my stock answer is hard to read, being 'I'll tell you when the cheque clears...'. Because you sure as heck are not going to commit until you figure out if being there resulted in anything to cover the time and money it cost... plus a bit on top to make it worthwhile.
And I defy most to know that, short of a guy whipping out his chequebook on the stand and making a purchase on the spot.
The best one gets (or at least I do), is 'a sense'.
So... what was my sense here? Short answer: No idea.
Unless you are odd, you are there to get in front of a person who will like your product or service enough to want to buy it. And I am pretty odd, having done several of these with such a vague offering (Junkk.com) that it was hard for anyone to know what to do with it. At least this time we had RE:tie. And in combo they did great. Our Steptoe-like stand was like no other, and certainly attracted many who were intrigued. This presented the opportunity to chat on re:use in general, and then close with the RE:tie. And one has to presume anyone who devotes the time and cost to visit 'Innovative Packaging/ECOPACK' must be quite keen on, well, innovative or eco-packaging.
Being 'co-located', there were in fact three distinct but complementary events running concurrently. At one end was Innovative Packaging, at the other ECOPACK, and in the middle
Packtech & Contract Pack. Hence our main interest was our end and t'other end, as the bit in the middle was mainly big machines sticking stuff on or in things. And we presumed our audience would come to us for the same synergistic reasons.
So... who came? Well, the reason for the stand was to capture the Heads of Marketing, PR, Production and CSR of the likes of Tesco, Unilever and Kelloggs. Sadly, they did not seem to make it. But all those companies' logos are on the cards of folk who did stop by. The key is whether they are senior or motivated enough to turn their interest and enthusiasm (which all were... very) into actual follow-up. But it's a start. There were also the mysterious one. These are folk who don't wear their badges. I have a theory that they are either big shots not wanting to be pestered or minnows who don't want to be seen for what they are so they can nick a free pen and mint. At least one hopes there were some big shots breezing by. Then it's a case of fingers crossed they see what you are doing and bear you in mind. Unlikely.
And finally the media. Not good. I did not get the impression the show was very well attended by anyone, even from the trades, much less the nationals. Which, bearing in mind the interest in packaging these days is odd... and sad. We did get a few visits, but all from overseas design magazines!
As to fellow exhibitors, I was pretty disappointed. Though there were lots of nice folk, there were very few products to float my boat. In the innovative bit there were a few cute designs, but nothing special. And in ECOPACK about 99% were bio/compostable trays. Some worthy... some not so sure. A less than inspiring collection, at least in a reuse sense.
I am having a definite rethink on our ideas-packed stand. Great for educational shows, but to attract a business visit maybe it's time to invest in one of those pull-up Nimlock jobbies and just stick it up with one message and a sample on the table. KISS.
Was it worth it? Hard to say. Between the stand and my speaking there were several score who loved what we're about and with whom who knows what may transpire. And all it takes is one nugget to turn things around and cover the costs.That's the trouble with the old digging for gold thing... unless you keep digging you may miss the seam that lies just a few more feet ahead.
Frankly, our thinking is that it's now time to go personal, and pick up the phone and make appointments. One thing the stand did show was that when people get the 30' elevator they 'get' it and like it. And a phone call and a warm-lead trip is a lot better than standing in a 3x4m void hoping. And for several thousand pounds paid for the stand and logistics, you can make quite a few sales calls.
On an 'in-passing note' , what was interesting is that the NEC has recycling bins in the foyer with four choices of separation (no glass, oddly). Inside, there were a few token cardboard jobs for paper, but as to the rest... chuck it in the bin mate!
There was also a repeat at the end of what I witness time and again with events that claim to be green. With no excuse, but plenty of fair reason in a world dominated by time and cash pressures. As soon as the end bell rang everything got thrown away in the dash to strike stands as quickly as possible and get gone with as little to weigh one down. Of course every part of ours was/is reusable, so I was one of the last to leave. I even tried to get our press kits back, mainly because they are reusable and expensive to make up, but of course they were already in a skip. Frustrating.
And maybe a fair metaphor for the show. A bit too much trying to look green and not enough actually wanting to really be it. But maybe one or two of those visitors will make it worth our whiles to have gone... and us being their the same for them.
No suprise at all
Given that our Gov cannot even decide what actual CO2 emissions are (see previous post), it comes as no surprise, too, that they are failing to meet their own internal CO2 emission reduction targets, as reported in the Guardian.
"Apart from the Ministry of Defence, which significantly reduced its emissions in 2005/6 following a part privatisation, central government now emits 22% more than it did in 1999, according to the sustainable development commission."
Looking good to achieve the set targets then? (Even though they are probably not sure what the targets actually are.). I think not!
"It recommends that each department urgently reduces its annual energy budget and only uses air travel when there is no alternative."
Hahahahahahaha! Sorry, I'm rolling about laughing at that one! It seems to me that when it comes to the great and good in our Gov, air travel IS the chosen option at ALL times EXCEPT when there is no flight available to a specific destination.
To be fair, sometimes there really is no option; after all, it a damned long way by train from Kings Cross to Bali or Washington.
ADDENDUM 1 (from Junkk Male):
To be fair, it seems they are on the case. PR as provided in full, with a few highlights and comments by yours truly:
New centre of expertise for cutting carbon emissions across Whitehall
Government response to Sustainable Development Commission's Sustainable Development in
A new Centre of Expertise is to be set up to help Whitehall departments achieve their targets for reducing carbon emissions and waste across the government estate.
Details of the Centre of Expertise for Sustainable Procurement (CESP) were unveiled as the Government published its response to the Sustainable Development Commission's latest report on how the Government is meeting its own sustainable objectives for tackling climate change.
Today's annual Sustainable Development in Government (SDiG) report by the independent watchdog and adviser on sustainability shows a small improvement in the Government's overall performance against its key ‘eco’ commitments – including a four per cent fall in carbon emissions across the estate by the end of 2006/7. However, the Commission called on departments to urgently build on initiatives already taken to ensure targets can be met and to demonstrate that the Government is leading by example on sustainability.
The CESP will be set up within the Office of Government Commerce (OGC) alongside the Government's Chief Sustainability Officer – a new post to be appointed to take forward a culture of change across all departments in sustainable operations and procurement.
Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell, who took personal charge of work in this area last March, has made sustainability of the government estate one of his four priorities for the civil service. Sir Gus said:
“The Civil Service must be fully committed to sustainable working, reflecting the increasing priority placed on environmental responsibility by the public we serve. We must find new and innovative ways of raising the bar for sustainable working, planning and procurement.
“There is still a long way to go but the establishment of the Centre of Expertise for Sustainable Procurement marks the culmination of significant progress over the last twelve months. This central co-ordination and guidance will help all government departments work to deliver sustainable working practices for the future.”
Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said:
“In the year that has elapsed since the period covered by this report, departments have been working to cut emissions, waste and water use and to increase recycling levels.
“The measures we're announcing today will help us to do better in the year ahead.”
Nigel Smith, Chief Executive of OGC, also spoke about the way forward to ensure sustainable practice and procurement. He said:
“Government is taking the issue of sustainability very seriously, but we recognise that we need to do a lot more in order to meet the targets we have set ourselves. We can only do this if we build on the best practice that exists across Government, and if we have good and robust information, so that we know what's happening, what impact our actions are having and where the gaps are. I'm therefore delighted that the new Centre for Expertise is to be established in OGC, and that all Departments are committed to supporting its work.
“OGC has a strong track record in achieving quantifiable results across Government, based on robust data, clear standard-setting, and close and collaborative working with Departments to achieve delivery. We believe we are now well-placed to lead real change.”
The Government accepts in principle all the recommendations made by the SDC, and among the steps that will now be taken are the following:
* From April 2008 all departmental heads will have a specific objective to meet Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate (SOGE) targets, against which their performance will be assessed
* A major Green Government IT programme will be launched in the summer - Another one?
* From 2010 all central Government departments will be included in a pioneering emissions trading scheme, the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC), which will compel them to improve their energy efficiency. This mandatory emissions trading scheme will cover around 5000 public and private organisations, including government departments, retailers, banks and local authorities, which combined account for 10 per cent of the UK economy's emissions
* Action to achieve the work space efficiency standard of 12 square metres per FTE will be published in April 2008
* From this summer all new vehicles used by ministers and permanent secretaries (except a small number exempt for operational reasons) will have carbon emissions below 130g/km
* The use of bottled water for meetings and other official business is to be phased (er, can't they just, um, stop?) out across the whole government estate by the summer
In its response to the report, the Government accepts the need for more better and more accurate data against which the progress of departments can be measured. A major validation exercise to upgrade the quality of data provided to the SDC and the baselines used to assess performance has been undertaken in the past two months.
1. The 2007 Sustainable Development in Government (SDiG) report, published today, assesses the performance of central Government operations for 2006/07 against the targets of the Framework for Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate (SOGE).
2. The Government's formal response to the 2007 SDiG report can be found at
I must confess that I only just got around to this by virtue of rolling on the floor laughing silly at the notion of the creation of another 'Centre of Expertise', mind. That those highly talented, highly paid folk in various departments need yet more folk in new ones to help them all do, er, less, is choice.
Addendum 2: (Dave)
Ooooo-errr. A response from Hilary Benn, no less, to an earlier article claiming that our Gov was issuing 'misleading' figures on the overall UK's CO2 emissions. "It is nonsense". So that's OK then.
"Apart from the Ministry of Defence, which significantly reduced its emissions in 2005/6 following a part privatisation, central government now emits 22% more than it did in 1999, according to the sustainable development commission."
Looking good to achieve the set targets then? (Even though they are probably not sure what the targets actually are.). I think not!
"It recommends that each department urgently reduces its annual energy budget and only uses air travel when there is no alternative."
Hahahahahahaha! Sorry, I'm rolling about laughing at that one! It seems to me that when it comes to the great and good in our Gov, air travel IS the chosen option at ALL times EXCEPT when there is no flight available to a specific destination.
To be fair, sometimes there really is no option; after all, it a damned long way by train from Kings Cross to Bali or Washington.
ADDENDUM 1 (from Junkk Male):
To be fair, it seems they are on the case. PR as provided in full, with a few highlights and comments by yours truly:
New centre of expertise for cutting carbon emissions across Whitehall
Government response to Sustainable Development Commission's Sustainable Development in
A new Centre of Expertise is to be set up to help Whitehall departments achieve their targets for reducing carbon emissions and waste across the government estate.
Details of the Centre of Expertise for Sustainable Procurement (CESP) were unveiled as the Government published its response to the Sustainable Development Commission's latest report on how the Government is meeting its own sustainable objectives for tackling climate change.
Today's annual Sustainable Development in Government (SDiG) report by the independent watchdog and adviser on sustainability shows a small improvement in the Government's overall performance against its key ‘eco’ commitments – including a four per cent fall in carbon emissions across the estate by the end of 2006/7. However, the Commission called on departments to urgently build on initiatives already taken to ensure targets can be met and to demonstrate that the Government is leading by example on sustainability.
The CESP will be set up within the Office of Government Commerce (OGC) alongside the Government's Chief Sustainability Officer – a new post to be appointed to take forward a culture of change across all departments in sustainable operations and procurement.
Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell, who took personal charge of work in this area last March, has made sustainability of the government estate one of his four priorities for the civil service. Sir Gus said:
“The Civil Service must be fully committed to sustainable working, reflecting the increasing priority placed on environmental responsibility by the public we serve. We must find new and innovative ways of raising the bar for sustainable working, planning and procurement.
“There is still a long way to go but the establishment of the Centre of Expertise for Sustainable Procurement marks the culmination of significant progress over the last twelve months. This central co-ordination and guidance will help all government departments work to deliver sustainable working practices for the future.”
Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said:
“In the year that has elapsed since the period covered by this report, departments have been working to cut emissions, waste and water use and to increase recycling levels.
“The measures we're announcing today will help us to do better in the year ahead.”
Nigel Smith, Chief Executive of OGC, also spoke about the way forward to ensure sustainable practice and procurement. He said:
“Government is taking the issue of sustainability very seriously, but we recognise that we need to do a lot more in order to meet the targets we have set ourselves. We can only do this if we build on the best practice that exists across Government, and if we have good and robust information, so that we know what's happening, what impact our actions are having and where the gaps are. I'm therefore delighted that the new Centre for Expertise is to be established in OGC, and that all Departments are committed to supporting its work.
“OGC has a strong track record in achieving quantifiable results across Government, based on robust data, clear standard-setting, and close and collaborative working with Departments to achieve delivery. We believe we are now well-placed to lead real change.”
The Government accepts in principle all the recommendations made by the SDC, and among the steps that will now be taken are the following:
* From April 2008 all departmental heads will have a specific objective to meet Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate (SOGE) targets, against which their performance will be assessed
* A major Green Government IT programme will be launched in the summer - Another one?
* From 2010 all central Government departments will be included in a pioneering emissions trading scheme, the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC), which will compel them to improve their energy efficiency. This mandatory emissions trading scheme will cover around 5000 public and private organisations, including government departments, retailers, banks and local authorities, which combined account for 10 per cent of the UK economy's emissions
* Action to achieve the work space efficiency standard of 12 square metres per FTE will be published in April 2008
* From this summer all new vehicles used by ministers and permanent secretaries (except a small number exempt for operational reasons) will have carbon emissions below 130g/km
* The use of bottled water for meetings and other official business is to be phased (er, can't they just, um, stop?) out across the whole government estate by the summer
In its response to the report, the Government accepts the need for more better and more accurate data against which the progress of departments can be measured. A major validation exercise to upgrade the quality of data provided to the SDC and the baselines used to assess performance has been undertaken in the past two months.
1. The 2007 Sustainable Development in Government (SDiG) report, published today, assesses the performance of central Government operations for 2006/07 against the targets of the Framework for Sustainable Operations on the Government Estate (SOGE).
2. The Government's formal response to the 2007 SDiG report can be found at
I must confess that I only just got around to this by virtue of rolling on the floor laughing silly at the notion of the creation of another 'Centre of Expertise', mind. That those highly talented, highly paid folk in various departments need yet more folk in new ones to help them all do, er, less, is choice.
Addendum 2: (Dave)
Ooooo-errr. A response from Hilary Benn, no less, to an earlier article claiming that our Gov was issuing 'misleading' figures on the overall UK's CO2 emissions. "It is nonsense". So that's OK then.
Monday, March 17, 2008
If we don't know what our emissions are now ....
... how the hell can we commit to set reduction targets?
This from Public Servant Daily defines the problem. It seems our Gov is consistently using two different measures for calculating CO2 emissions, neither of which agree with each other (by as much as 12%!!). Sooooo, OK, just how on earth are we supposed to achieve our targets then?
Oh well, they are only targets, aren't they. And targets, being entirely movable, malleable and stretchable, don't seem to be of much relevance (other than in self promotion and in the 'crowing' stakes) in the great Gov scheme of things nowadays.
I suppose if you are not even sure where the football pitch is, it doesn't really matter how much you move the goalposts.
This from Public Servant Daily defines the problem. It seems our Gov is consistently using two different measures for calculating CO2 emissions, neither of which agree with each other (by as much as 12%!!). Sooooo, OK, just how on earth are we supposed to achieve our targets then?
Oh well, they are only targets, aren't they. And targets, being entirely movable, malleable and stretchable, don't seem to be of much relevance (other than in self promotion and in the 'crowing' stakes) in the great Gov scheme of things nowadays.
I suppose if you are not even sure where the football pitch is, it doesn't really matter how much you move the goalposts.
It's jobs, Jim, but not as we know it.
And they are for the boys, aren't they: Job offer: CEO of Renewable Fuels Agency
Yup. Saw that.
And I wondered just how many folk there are already out there in quangoland, and being joined daily by those whose skills and experience make them worth the £100k of public funds (plus dental) to make vast differences, such as one can appreciate from 'Working closely with the Board and Government Departments to ensure that key targets and statutory obligations are met and exceeded.'
I feel better about my kids' futures already.
Yup. Saw that.
And I wondered just how many folk there are already out there in quangoland, and being joined daily by those whose skills and experience make them worth the £100k of public funds (plus dental) to make vast differences, such as one can appreciate from 'Working closely with the Board and Government Departments to ensure that key targets and statutory obligations are met and exceeded.'
I feel better about my kids' futures already.
PROF's POSER - Clinging to the right notion?
Smug alert!
As I write, I am tucking into the remnants of yesterday's Sunday lunch. Basically all the bits the boys didn't fancy, microwaved for 2 glorious minutes.
Now, here's the thing.
It was mircowaved in one of the containers that yesterday's pie came in. Makes sense.
Thing is, that combo lurked in the fridge (once it had cooled down outside first... I know my stuff. Well, some of it) overnight, sealed away under a wrapping of... clingfilm!
Now, I don't know about you, but the very idea of tearing of a strip of extra plastic these days was about as far from my mind as possible.
But my wife, bless her, gave me pause. Because, as she pointed out, I was going to transfer the left-overs from the tray to a plate or Tupperware, and in the latter case then tip onto a plate to heat up. And once all that was over, there was going to be some hot water washing required.
So my poser for the day is... which has the better enviROI? The consequences of 1 sqft of thin plastic (now in the recycling bin, where it will doubtless not be appreciated - see LABELLING), or the couple of cups of hot water to clean the crockery?
This oen is up there with storing PDFs vs. printing and deleting.
As I write, I am tucking into the remnants of yesterday's Sunday lunch. Basically all the bits the boys didn't fancy, microwaved for 2 glorious minutes.
Now, here's the thing.
It was mircowaved in one of the containers that yesterday's pie came in. Makes sense.
Thing is, that combo lurked in the fridge (once it had cooled down outside first... I know my stuff. Well, some of it) overnight, sealed away under a wrapping of... clingfilm!
Now, I don't know about you, but the very idea of tearing of a strip of extra plastic these days was about as far from my mind as possible.
But my wife, bless her, gave me pause. Because, as she pointed out, I was going to transfer the left-overs from the tray to a plate or Tupperware, and in the latter case then tip onto a plate to heat up. And once all that was over, there was going to be some hot water washing required.
So my poser for the day is... which has the better enviROI? The consequences of 1 sqft of thin plastic (now in the recycling bin, where it will doubtless not be appreciated - see LABELLING), or the couple of cups of hot water to clean the crockery?
This oen is up there with storing PDFs vs. printing and deleting.
EVENT - National Downshifting Week
No, not an attempt by Top Gear to squeeze a few more G's and reduce the mpg's by dropping a gear to take each corner sideways! Much more mellow... and green.
I came across Tracey Smith as a like-minded soul just trying to do her bit, and sharing stuff in a slightly more practical, less dogmatic way than most.
And we've stayed in touch off and on ever since. Well, thanks to my getting my digit out and sending off the newsletter, we ended up having a chat, one thing lead to another thing, and...
Well, for a start, she buttered me up big time by asking for a 'celebrity' (I'm gunning to get into the alphabet at all, but am happy and flattered and honoured to be in the company of some eco- 'A' listers there) quote for her site. Which I was happy to provide.
Then she interviewed me for her forthcoming book - 'The Book of Rubbish Ideas' - which we will of course be promoting all round when it hits the streets. With Junkk.com's strap line being 'Rubbish doesn't have to be a dirty word' there's a clear fit!
And finally, she has asked for a mention of her forthcoming 'National Downshifting Week' . From the lady herself:
'It's fast approaching the next National Downshifting Week, or should I say InterNational! Following on from polite and welcome pressure from friends and organisations in countries around the world, I decided to make this little awareness campaign fully inclusive, so that everyone who wants to can take part.
So what's the event all about? Well, in a nutshell, the simple living suggestions contained within the campaign can help you 'slow down and green up', live more sustainably and get a better work and life balance. It takes place between the 19th and 25th April and to take part, all you have to do is dip your toes into one of the ideas. If you like it and how you feel about having tried it, why not try another on day 2, day 3 and so on through the week.
IDW differs from a few other campaigns because there's not an ounce of guilt in sight! You are 'positively encouraged' to embrace living with less and to find your comfort level of downshift and every single change you make as a result of leaning towards the green will make an enormous collective difference, so believe that you're changing the world, because you are and join in with the 'thousands' of others who are focused on a bit of simple, green living this year too. Last year saw just under 11,000 people taking part worldwide - this year, with your help to spread the word too, it will easily top it, so take a look at the website and see what you fancy sinking your teeth into first!'
I came across Tracey Smith as a like-minded soul just trying to do her bit, and sharing stuff in a slightly more practical, less dogmatic way than most.
And we've stayed in touch off and on ever since. Well, thanks to my getting my digit out and sending off the newsletter, we ended up having a chat, one thing lead to another thing, and...
Well, for a start, she buttered me up big time by asking for a 'celebrity' (I'm gunning to get into the alphabet at all, but am happy and flattered and honoured to be in the company of some eco- 'A' listers there) quote for her site. Which I was happy to provide.
Then she interviewed me for her forthcoming book - 'The Book of Rubbish Ideas' - which we will of course be promoting all round when it hits the streets. With Junkk.com's strap line being 'Rubbish doesn't have to be a dirty word' there's a clear fit!
And finally, she has asked for a mention of her forthcoming 'National Downshifting Week' . From the lady herself:
'It's fast approaching the next National Downshifting Week, or should I say InterNational! Following on from polite and welcome pressure from friends and organisations in countries around the world, I decided to make this little awareness campaign fully inclusive, so that everyone who wants to can take part.
So what's the event all about? Well, in a nutshell, the simple living suggestions contained within the campaign can help you 'slow down and green up', live more sustainably and get a better work and life balance. It takes place between the 19th and 25th April and to take part, all you have to do is dip your toes into one of the ideas. If you like it and how you feel about having tried it, why not try another on day 2, day 3 and so on through the week.
IDW differs from a few other campaigns because there's not an ounce of guilt in sight! You are 'positively encouraged' to embrace living with less and to find your comfort level of downshift and every single change you make as a result of leaning towards the green will make an enormous collective difference, so believe that you're changing the world, because you are and join in with the 'thousands' of others who are focused on a bit of simple, green living this year too. Last year saw just under 11,000 people taking part worldwide - this year, with your help to spread the word too, it will easily top it, so take a look at the website and see what you fancy sinking your teeth into first!'
Alternative views
The Indy Letters page is always a worthy scope: 'Fuel cards' to fight climate change
Often good suggestions, pithily posed (for some reason they never print mine - even when i try a do pithy)
Take the one on fuel cards. Soul of reason. What's not to like?
Thing is, I stumble with the pure 'tax fuel' notion because it doesn't seem to take into account those who live and work where a car is needed a lot more than places where it is not.
It's a complex interaction, from manufacture through purchase to use and duration to disposal that cannot be reduced so simplistically. And then there are the related issues of alternatives. You simply can't equate an Islingtonista with a Prius for the weekend jaunt to Devon, with a Midlander who has a Fiesta for the daily 100 mile round trip to the factory.
Meanwhile, as I read on to the issue of watercress (next ban?)...
... watercress has been sourced from the US for more than 20 years, many of the farms being British owned. The watercress is air-freighted on passenger-scheduled airlines, so as to reduce carbon emissions.
Try as I might, I can't see how air-freighting something reduces carbon emissions. At least without some qualifier to explain the possible alternatives.
Often good suggestions, pithily posed (for some reason they never print mine - even when i try a do pithy)
Take the one on fuel cards. Soul of reason. What's not to like?
Thing is, I stumble with the pure 'tax fuel' notion because it doesn't seem to take into account those who live and work where a car is needed a lot more than places where it is not.
It's a complex interaction, from manufacture through purchase to use and duration to disposal that cannot be reduced so simplistically. And then there are the related issues of alternatives. You simply can't equate an Islingtonista with a Prius for the weekend jaunt to Devon, with a Midlander who has a Fiesta for the daily 100 mile round trip to the factory.
Meanwhile, as I read on to the issue of watercress (next ban?)...
... watercress has been sourced from the US for more than 20 years, many of the farms being British owned. The watercress is air-freighted on passenger-scheduled airlines, so as to reduce carbon emissions.
Try as I might, I can't see how air-freighting something reduces carbon emissions. At least without some qualifier to explain the possible alternatives.
Amazing what gets missed...
I quite like Raymond Snoddy of the BBC's Newswatch programme.
Even on the on-air show he does seem to try, and though the whole format (a 'mea culpa' stuck on at dawn on the weekend to 'atone' or 'explain' (though sulky editors saying they don't see what the fuss is about hardly counts as either) for high-profile boo-boos in the peak hours seems contrived at best, just to tick a 'we're listening' box. Few complaints get followed up and fade away.
But in print he seem even more diligent, though it now occurs to me that I thought BBC journos were not supposed to write outside of Auntie to avoid accusations of... well, anything.
Anyway, check out the bit halfway down his Indy column, entitled Emily gets short shrift
I'm sorry I missed it.
Because, speaking of being tucked away, as HRH might say, one's gob is smacked that stuff is been created and broadcast that purports to be 'based on' factual, when it is nothing of the sort. It's just agenda dressed up as news, or information.
And if they can do this here, well, New York, New York, they can do it anywhere.
But then, this is a Corporation where 'staff somehow also managed to mislay champagne worth a total of £818...'.
Now I see why my licence fee must go up.
Even on the on-air show he does seem to try, and though the whole format (a 'mea culpa' stuck on at dawn on the weekend to 'atone' or 'explain' (though sulky editors saying they don't see what the fuss is about hardly counts as either) for high-profile boo-boos in the peak hours seems contrived at best, just to tick a 'we're listening' box. Few complaints get followed up and fade away.
But in print he seem even more diligent, though it now occurs to me that I thought BBC journos were not supposed to write outside of Auntie to avoid accusations of... well, anything.
Anyway, check out the bit halfway down his Indy column, entitled Emily gets short shrift
I'm sorry I missed it.
Because, speaking of being tucked away, as HRH might say, one's gob is smacked that stuff is been created and broadcast that purports to be 'based on' factual, when it is nothing of the sort. It's just agenda dressed up as news, or information.
And if they can do this here, well, New York, New York, they can do it anywhere.
But then, this is a Corporation where 'staff somehow also managed to mislay champagne worth a total of £818...'.
Now I see why my licence fee must go up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)