I am all for positives, but some do stretch things a tad: Defra hails 'positive green' readers
The up side is that one in five of the population are 'positive greens', though the definition requires an eyebrow cock between self-perception, research definition and actual enviROI+ behaviour.
Where I am a little intrigued is the the leap from the Indy's readership that I believe numbers a few hundred thousand.
Sounds an interesting report and I'd like to see it. Odd that I have never heard of it 'til now, and it is not linked to.
Actually, many of the subsequent insights were/are very telling, and frankly deserve greater consideration.
I leave you with this: 'Some people in the greenest categories have higher carbon footprints than others because of their high incomes'. Mainly Indy readers and BBC employees and supporters, I'd hazard all now planning their next skiing trips along with the next ban-it campaign for some minor enviro-nuisance.
It all rather smacks of being happier with looking good rather than doing it to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I believe in freedom of speech. But I also don't like bullies on blogs, even verbal ones, as they can drive away those with something valid to say... or offer.
Subjective is fine, but well argued and substantiated is even better. Calm and polite tops. Anything that crosses my personal line will not go up. There may be reasons given, but not guaranteed.
I'm not too keen on 'Anon' as a handle (and the content usually explains why), so if that's what you opt for it may not make it. Sorry.