Bisphenol A is a chemical substance used widely around this planet in food and drink packaging, as it is a common component in many widely used plastics, including those used for bottled water. It a a basic monomer used in polycarbonates, and is also utilised in polyesters and polyether ketones. At one time it was actually used as an anti-oxidant in foodstuffs, so those of us a little longer in the tooth have probably eaten it for years, because it had always been regarded as having a low acute toxicity. It is still used in the products used to line the insides of canned foods so there is still a potential direct food contamination possible from this source.
So why the concern? Again from RedOrbit, it appears that Bisphenol A mimics oestrogen, the primary female sex hormone. A quick web search finds that some research also suggests Bisphenol A is potentially carcinogenic and may be linked to breast cancer, could be a cause of lower sperm counts, and it has even been linked to Schizophrenia.
Yes, there are a lot of 'may' and 'could' words in there, but whilst the Canadian Gov appears to be doing something about it, as in a major revue of the chemical and its possible effects on humans, I'll bet our Gov does nothing for years!
Addendum:
More on this story and the effects the information has had on the plastic bottled water industry from the Financial Post.
Showing posts with label FOOD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FOOD. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Leftover policies
It's one of those things where you can't help but agree, but equally have to wonder what the heck is going to happen if 'the Man' decides to get involved: Watching your waste
I just hope to heck we don't get subjected to some multi-million £ piece of pointless ad campaigning (shoot, I just read on. We are) where the money could be so easily, and effectively, be applied elsewhere.
I think we have to think laterally.
Speaking personally on a family issue, we are looking at reducing waste still further on a money and health basis. At the moment, we do still waste a portion, but it's mainly the kids, and that then gets consumed by yours truly either on the spot or the next day. I'm not getting any thinner.
One area we are looking at portions a lot more closely. The other month my godmother gave* me a piece of wood with four holes in it to measure 1-4 portions of spaghetti. Works a treat.
ADDENDUM - Just finished a lunch comprised mainly of what the boys didn't eat last night. I'm not sure a governminted campaign, a couple of slots on the BBC news and the nice lady from Good Housekeeping saying it's what Granny used to do is going to swing them much. But we can hope.
Meanwhile I have been asked for a piccy of Aunty's SpagScale. I reminded me that I spend too much time talking and not enough doing. So it's up on this blog now, with a link to the site with instructions (well, drill a hole in a plank... D'uh).
*I fibbed a bit. She gave me 'the plan', a utensil rubbing of her fancy effort. And it only had 3 holes. Sorry. If you can do the maths I'm sure you can do one for any number. I'm guessing 40mm for four, and there's bound to me some whizzo numb3rs way to plot it.
I just hope to heck we don't get subjected to some multi-million £ piece of pointless ad campaigning (shoot, I just read on. We are) where the money could be so easily, and effectively, be applied elsewhere.
I think we have to think laterally.
Speaking personally on a family issue, we are looking at reducing waste still further on a money and health basis. At the moment, we do still waste a portion, but it's mainly the kids, and that then gets consumed by yours truly either on the spot or the next day. I'm not getting any thinner.
One area we are looking at portions a lot more closely. The other month my godmother gave* me a piece of wood with four holes in it to measure 1-4 portions of spaghetti. Works a treat.
ADDENDUM - Just finished a lunch comprised mainly of what the boys didn't eat last night. I'm not sure a governminted campaign, a couple of slots on the BBC news and the nice lady from Good Housekeeping saying it's what Granny used to do is going to swing them much. But we can hope.
Meanwhile I have been asked for a piccy of Aunty's SpagScale. I reminded me that I spend too much time talking and not enough doing. So it's up on this blog now, with a link to the site with instructions (well, drill a hole in a plank... D'uh).
*I fibbed a bit. She gave me 'the plan', a utensil rubbing of her fancy effort. And it only had 3 holes. Sorry. If you can do the maths I'm sure you can do one for any number. I'm guessing 40mm for four, and there's bound to me some whizzo numb3rs way to plot it.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Don't have a cow, man
Go back to your roots
Personally I'd do a little bit less predatory award-prowling via cheap and easy negative (which is what I think most 'Charity' ads are grasping for in blowing budgets) executions and try and earn one's keep (and maybe make a difference) by selling the positives.
The PETA ad is on the way, but personally I'd need to be persuaded that not succumbing to the exhortations of Beefy and Lamby did not involve a cow's exhaust (I believe it's their burps that are the culprit) when thinking of food, eating nut cutlets and being a shrew. Being married to a Chinese wok-mistress I know it can work when the option is served up in a way to make me actually want to bite.
There's also the small recognition that nature made most of us omnivores. So one needs to work with the design constraint rather than ignoring it.
ps: reuse and not cutting down forests in the first place are much better than recycling or planting trees if you're not into the reduction thing, in which case also try insulation, insulation, insulation. Trust me, I work with Junkk.com, and they know all about waste and rubbish ideas when they see 'em.
Personally I'd do a little bit less predatory award-prowling via cheap and easy negative (which is what I think most 'Charity' ads are grasping for in blowing budgets) executions and try and earn one's keep (and maybe make a difference) by selling the positives.
The PETA ad is on the way, but personally I'd need to be persuaded that not succumbing to the exhortations of Beefy and Lamby did not involve a cow's exhaust (I believe it's their burps that are the culprit) when thinking of food, eating nut cutlets and being a shrew. Being married to a Chinese wok-mistress I know it can work when the option is served up in a way to make me actually want to bite.
There's also the small recognition that nature made most of us omnivores. So one needs to work with the design constraint rather than ignoring it.
ps: reuse and not cutting down forests in the first place are much better than recycling or planting trees if you're not into the reduction thing, in which case also try insulation, insulation, insulation. Trust me, I work with Junkk.com, and they know all about waste and rubbish ideas when they see 'em.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
The looming food crisis?
Finally, one of the UK majors has picked up on what Peter was predicting in this very blog many, many months ago. The fact is that the switch of land use to grow crops for bio-fuels rather than for foodstuffs IS having an impact on food prices already.
This from the Guardian Environment highlights just what is already happening in parts of the world. The world price of maize has doubled, whilst UK wheat prices have also doubled over the last two years, from ~£100/tonne to ~£200/tonne (admittedly part of this increase is down to this years yield, which is down from the norm). A loaf of bread in the UK has increased in cost by 20% already this year.
In the US, "where nearly 40 million people are below the official poverty line, the Department of Agriculture recently predicted a 10% rise in the price of chicken. The prices of bread, beef, eggs and milk rose 7.5 % in July, the highest monthly rise in 25 years."
'A "perfect storm" of ecological and social factors appears to be gathering force, threatening vast numbers of people with food shortages and price rises. Even as the world's big farmers are pulling out of producing food for people and animals, the global population is rising by 87 million people a year; developing countries such as China and India are switching to meat-based diets that need more land; and climate change is starting to hit food producers hard. Recent reports in the journals Science and Nature suggest that one-third of ocean fisheries are in collapse, two-thirds will be in collapse by 2025, and all major ocean fisheries may be virtually gone by 2048. "Global grain supplies will drop to their lowest levels on record this year. Outside of wartime, they have not been this low in a century, perhaps longer," says the US Department of Agriculture.'
All in all, prospects don't look too good for the future. A substantial part of the food production in China and India is dependent on what are rapidly depleting (and non-replenishable) water sources. Experts believe that some two thirds of the planet's major fisheries are now at levels where serious and rapid decline in yields is starting to happen. When you then throw in climate change predictions from the IPCC, which suggested that some 20% of the planets crop production will be directly endangered by temperature and rainfall changes; plus the switch by major western farmers to agrofuels; the picture for the planet's poor and undernourished is beginning to look markedly bleak!
"Technologists pin their faith on GM crops, or drought- resistant crops, or trust that biofuel producers will develop technologies that require less raw material or use non-edible parts of food. The immediate best bet is that countries such as Argentina, Poland, Ukraine and Kazakhstan will grow more food for export as US output declines."
Me? I'm uncertain. I know mankind is incredibly adaptable and is capable of amazing things; but these just may be the early warning signals that our voracious appetite for food and resources is reaching the point where self-sustainability is going to become increasingly difficult.
Look what the fuel crisis (as a consequence of a handful of HGV drivers blockading refinery depots) a few years ago did to the UK economy in only a week and a half. Then imagine just what the impact would be if food was largely unavailable in the supermarkets for a similar time period.
Scary isn't it?
This from the Guardian Environment highlights just what is already happening in parts of the world. The world price of maize has doubled, whilst UK wheat prices have also doubled over the last two years, from ~£100/tonne to ~£200/tonne (admittedly part of this increase is down to this years yield, which is down from the norm). A loaf of bread in the UK has increased in cost by 20% already this year.
In the US, "where nearly 40 million people are below the official poverty line, the Department of Agriculture recently predicted a 10% rise in the price of chicken. The prices of bread, beef, eggs and milk rose 7.5 % in July, the highest monthly rise in 25 years."
'A "perfect storm" of ecological and social factors appears to be gathering force, threatening vast numbers of people with food shortages and price rises. Even as the world's big farmers are pulling out of producing food for people and animals, the global population is rising by 87 million people a year; developing countries such as China and India are switching to meat-based diets that need more land; and climate change is starting to hit food producers hard. Recent reports in the journals Science and Nature suggest that one-third of ocean fisheries are in collapse, two-thirds will be in collapse by 2025, and all major ocean fisheries may be virtually gone by 2048. "Global grain supplies will drop to their lowest levels on record this year. Outside of wartime, they have not been this low in a century, perhaps longer," says the US Department of Agriculture.'
All in all, prospects don't look too good for the future. A substantial part of the food production in China and India is dependent on what are rapidly depleting (and non-replenishable) water sources. Experts believe that some two thirds of the planet's major fisheries are now at levels where serious and rapid decline in yields is starting to happen. When you then throw in climate change predictions from the IPCC, which suggested that some 20% of the planets crop production will be directly endangered by temperature and rainfall changes; plus the switch by major western farmers to agrofuels; the picture for the planet's poor and undernourished is beginning to look markedly bleak!
"Technologists pin their faith on GM crops, or drought- resistant crops, or trust that biofuel producers will develop technologies that require less raw material or use non-edible parts of food. The immediate best bet is that countries such as Argentina, Poland, Ukraine and Kazakhstan will grow more food for export as US output declines."
Me? I'm uncertain. I know mankind is incredibly adaptable and is capable of amazing things; but these just may be the early warning signals that our voracious appetite for food and resources is reaching the point where self-sustainability is going to become increasingly difficult.
Look what the fuel crisis (as a consequence of a handful of HGV drivers blockading refinery depots) a few years ago did to the UK economy in only a week and a half. Then imagine just what the impact would be if food was largely unavailable in the supermarkets for a similar time period.
Scary isn't it?
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Agflation!
You've already got it, it's already affecting you and you just don't know it! But just what is agflation then?
Well, you've actually heard it described on this very blog on several posts from Peter over the last few months - he just didn't know, like me, that there was a term for it.
"Global corn stocks have fallen to their lowest levels since modern records began as ethanol plants consume an ever-growing share of output".
"The price of wheat has flown up by 53% since March last year to £130 a tonne"
And this is all before the impacts that our rather wet summer will have on local food prices here in the UK.
Crop and foodstuff prices may start to track the price of crude oil? Ridiculous? Well, read this from The Business and figure it for yourself!
I think I'll pop along and put my name down for an allotment tonight!
Well, you've actually heard it described on this very blog on several posts from Peter over the last few months - he just didn't know, like me, that there was a term for it.
"Global corn stocks have fallen to their lowest levels since modern records began as ethanol plants consume an ever-growing share of output".
"The price of wheat has flown up by 53% since March last year to £130 a tonne"
And this is all before the impacts that our rather wet summer will have on local food prices here in the UK.
Crop and foodstuff prices may start to track the price of crude oil? Ridiculous? Well, read this from The Business and figure it for yourself!
I think I'll pop along and put my name down for an allotment tonight!
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
BOGOF
If you're poor, ethical shopping means 9p beans
Having just read elsewhere some comments made by the NFU, and Mr. King's retort, I am not so sure it is in fact a win-win for 'everyone'.... especially the cause of helping the planet heal.
Many eco-initiatives that are proven to be effective, if only on an EnviROI (as opposed to going green without going into the red) basis, are a matter of making a conscious decisions to save the planet before the wallet.
Sadly supermarkets and their officers seem more concerned with profit and career first... and exclusively. Actual ethics only seem to kick in when the PR or CSR value is worthwhile. And a lot of media are happy to oblige them.
Telegraph - Dairy farmers warn of industry 'meltdown'
Times - Farmer's Challenge - Sounds like a quiz game!
I rather thought they have been. For a while.
But there is rather a problem with faith in toothless, old-boy or
downright lobby-phobic quangos these days.
So... to whom else is he suggesting they do this?
The purchasing munchkin with power over verbal contract
or no contract ever again, perhaps?
And, while we're at it, we'll ask all the other nasty folk around the
place to jolly well stop being beastly and play fair.
Yo! Ah,madinner'sbad! We've put out a ' noddymouse
sanctimonious fatwah. That'll see you, Jimmy!
Bless.
Having just read elsewhere some comments made by the NFU, and Mr. King's retort, I am not so sure it is in fact a win-win for 'everyone'.... especially the cause of helping the planet heal.
Many eco-initiatives that are proven to be effective, if only on an EnviROI (as opposed to going green without going into the red) basis, are a matter of making a conscious decisions to save the planet before the wallet.
Sadly supermarkets and their officers seem more concerned with profit and career first... and exclusively. Actual ethics only seem to kick in when the PR or CSR value is worthwhile. And a lot of media are happy to oblige them.
Telegraph - Dairy farmers warn of industry 'meltdown'
Times - Farmer's Challenge - Sounds like a quiz game!
I rather thought they have been. For a while.
But there is rather a problem with faith in toothless, old-boy or
downright lobby-phobic quangos these days.
So... to whom else is he suggesting they do this?
The purchasing munchkin with power over verbal contract
or no contract ever again, perhaps?
And, while we're at it, we'll ask all the other nasty folk around the
place to jolly well stop being beastly and play fair.
Yo! Ah,madinner'sbad! We've put out a ' noddymouse
sanctimonious fatwah. That'll see you, Jimmy!
Bless.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Swallowing your Greens. That's ratings.
Eco-label will create green standard for food, says Miliband
Will this be run alongside the one from the other retailers, which will be designed to tell a very different set of stories and totally flummox the consumer? Instead of traffic lights what will we have? Eco-stars? Green thumbs up? They are going to have to make the packs bigger at this rate (oh, the irony)! How many lobbyists, consultants and 'experts' will feed off this one for the next decade. Ship-borne dried apricots vs. airflown prawns vs. Spuds shunted from one end of the UK for scrubbing and then back to be deemed 'local' to where they are bought.
And are we going to have sub-sets where there is what is good for local farming, the local MP, the national purse, global environment, targets, media ratings and all the various pulls on green issues that can often be... at odds. Me, I vote less CO2... and unproductive civil servants and other talk-onlys to monitor and debate it all.
This is actually a great idea in principle, but when I see a PR piece floated telling me only something 'will be announced that is to considered' I have to wonder what exactly is going to be done at all, if ever.
For a change.
DEFRA - Mr. Miliband's Speech
Telegraph - 'Traffic light' labels backed by parents
Marketing Week - Parents reject GDA labelling system
BBC - Public want food 'traffic lights'
Will this be run alongside the one from the other retailers, which will be designed to tell a very different set of stories and totally flummox the consumer? Instead of traffic lights what will we have? Eco-stars? Green thumbs up? They are going to have to make the packs bigger at this rate (oh, the irony)! How many lobbyists, consultants and 'experts' will feed off this one for the next decade. Ship-borne dried apricots vs. airflown prawns vs. Spuds shunted from one end of the UK for scrubbing and then back to be deemed 'local' to where they are bought.
And are we going to have sub-sets where there is what is good for local farming, the local MP, the national purse, global environment, targets, media ratings and all the various pulls on green issues that can often be... at odds. Me, I vote less CO2... and unproductive civil servants and other talk-onlys to monitor and debate it all.
This is actually a great idea in principle, but when I see a PR piece floated telling me only something 'will be announced that is to considered' I have to wonder what exactly is going to be done at all, if ever.
For a change.
DEFRA - Mr. Miliband's Speech
Telegraph - 'Traffic light' labels backed by parents
Marketing Week - Parents reject GDA labelling system
BBC - Public want food 'traffic lights'
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Leaving a bad taste
Are you really buying British?
All good stuff.
But what is the poor consumer to make of it all?
Elsewhere in the blogosphere today we have that actually your Valentine's posy from Kenya is better than the one from Holland because it wasn't raised using artificial heat. So food miles are not enough, if your concern is more enviro that nationalistic.
All good stuff.
But what is the poor consumer to make of it all?
Elsewhere in the blogosphere today we have that actually your Valentine's posy from Kenya is better than the one from Holland because it wasn't raised using artificial heat. So food miles are not enough, if your concern is more enviro that nationalistic.
Sunday, February 04, 2007
You are who you eat
Meet Daisy the cow – global climate’s enemy number one.
"To the person who gets this far to read this (if it is not moderated)... good Sunday morning! It's glorious here in Ross. Let's enjoy such weather while we can.
The ICCP report came out 2 days ago. I have just conducted an interesting (well, to me), analysis of coverage since:
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/02/10-years-and-human-race-is-screwed-but.html
On the day in question, Newsnight devoted itself to the issue. There was Ms. Watts' (great name, all things considered) slot, with Mr. Milliband 'talking' about the need for 'action'. No change there, then.
And then, to round up on the day we are told we are 10 years from catastrophe, we have a slot on... cow farts (tee -hee). And the conclusion is, well, 'it's not really for me so back to the burgers.'
What next? 'Actually those low energy bulbs are expensive, don't last as long and are dimmer, so bring back the 100W pearlies!!' (Justin - Where did you get the low-energy LED halogen-effect spotlights in your kitchen, by the by?).
Anyway as we're on meat, and turkey (looks like Dan was spared a fate worse than sneezing to death) is off the menu (if not all the front pages) for a while I guess, let's get onto what apparently really matters at this juncture in our planet's survival.
A lot of folk seem to think man is at odds with nature, in the same way as a lion defending his territory to the death is ok, but my owning property 'is theft'.
Well, without getting too theological, we kinda stemmed from the same design-shop, and it's looking like we're pretty flawed.
We've done what (forgive the pun) comes naturally for a while now, and there's quite a lot of us. No more space to stand on and grow stuff, but we're still populating away, whilst merrily turning the growing bits into sources of fuel for our dear leader to gad about on the lecture circuit.
Speaking of what's not practical, Justin's reversion is not so surprising, because another aspect to the design flaw is that 'we' (even those who don't by choice) are omnivores. Not a mandatory by diet, but certainly a powerful force by programming (as is making things, trading them, boldly going... etc).
Trouble is, in addition to being told by 2500 of the world's finest (and the media, if only until yesterday), that we're screwed in 10 years if we go on as we are, I'm not seeing any great sense of cutting back on the LCD purchases, Vista upgrades, trips to study the impact of GW on whales (what used to be called a 'holiday' for the public, or a 'jolly' for the green elite).. or the filet mignon.
Which may be a bit of a problem soon, as the guys with the cows fight it out for space with the guys growing biofuels. I'm guessing bread will be history by then.
So, to this carnivore at least, as we're not doing anything yet about population, and the lobbyist power plus short-term political survival instincts (at least until the gold-plated, index-linked retirement is over) has meant that the commercial/governmental fudge on all things manufacturing and travel will continue, we better sort those dastardly bovines out right now. At least to buy some more time to fudge a bit longer.
As an ex-scientist, the numbers seem clear. If we are talking about nutritional ROI on our available land, we should all go veggie (I'm never to clear on the 'arian/egan' thing - one seems doable, the other a good way to fit into those size 0's) asap. It's just what is eventually all that will be sustainable. And even then it is just another delaying measure if other issues are not addressed. Though Avian flu may end up as a nifty, natural, Malthusian correction. Temporarily.
But as we'll doubtless conquer that (assuming it hasn't been created to sort out a few of the other problems by guys like Hugo Drax - have fun googling that. If it's true can I have the antivirus for sussing it out, please?), I have only two words for you, and as a guy who just turned 50 my hand shakes as I write them: Soylent Green."
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
I have a dream...
Sometimes you do feel rotten for pricking a lovely bubble: Take to the fields
His warning is fair. His ideas noble. But I do feel it rather ignores, like so many do, some practical issues.
"I've often thought the purest form of career is to till one's own fields and be totally self-sufficient. It all goes a bit pear-shaped when the kids want power for the X-box and granny gets cholera from the well being sited downstream of the dunny, but there is a buried yearning for how it once was before money and trade.
Now, if we can just get those self-same, curiously-busy-in-even-more-curious (and some might say even trivial, in the great scheme of things) directions governments to just sort out that pesky expanding global population thing at the same time as getting back to basics on sources of food, we'd be much better off.
So I'd really rather we were a bit more cautious about substituting biofourstar for spuds quite yet."
His warning is fair. His ideas noble. But I do feel it rather ignores, like so many do, some practical issues.
"I've often thought the purest form of career is to till one's own fields and be totally self-sufficient. It all goes a bit pear-shaped when the kids want power for the X-box and granny gets cholera from the well being sited downstream of the dunny, but there is a buried yearning for how it once was before money and trade.
Now, if we can just get those self-same, curiously-busy-in-even-more-curious (and some might say even trivial, in the great scheme of things) directions governments to just sort out that pesky expanding global population thing at the same time as getting back to basics on sources of food, we'd be much better off.
So I'd really rather we were a bit more cautious about substituting biofourstar for spuds quite yet."
Monday, January 15, 2007
We are what we eat
An old politician has raised what he claims is a moral issue: Morality at mealtime
Unsurprisingly, it seems to be a can/can't, is/isn't playground spat bet wen extreme vegans and blood-thirsty carnivores already.
"I almost ignored this discussion as it did not immediately seem to cover my usual remit, which is trying to identify and support any and all ways to ensure we have a future (aka 'help saving the planet')... pragmatically. But of course it is, in more than most ways, and I guess morally is in there somewhere.
Skipping quickly over finite land space and the ever-growing population it is expected to support, it seems pretty clear to me scientifically, that, per acre, veg is better than meat.
Against this 'fact', is another inconvenient one of nature: we were, to the best of my understanding designed to be omnivores.
So, in time, I see a bit of a do on the horizon, perhaps a tad after 4x4s and cheap flights, where to survive at the maximum numbers the planet can sustain (which will, sadly, have an upper limit no matter what choice of cuisine we are given – it will be fun to see who grabs the mantle of trading in this), it may be necessary to ban or price out certain key elements of our dietary lifestyles. Enjoy.
Solyent Green anyone?"
Unsurprisingly, it seems to be a can/can't, is/isn't playground spat bet wen extreme vegans and blood-thirsty carnivores already.
"I almost ignored this discussion as it did not immediately seem to cover my usual remit, which is trying to identify and support any and all ways to ensure we have a future (aka 'help saving the planet')... pragmatically. But of course it is, in more than most ways, and I guess morally is in there somewhere.
Skipping quickly over finite land space and the ever-growing population it is expected to support, it seems pretty clear to me scientifically, that, per acre, veg is better than meat.
Against this 'fact', is another inconvenient one of nature: we were, to the best of my understanding designed to be omnivores.
So, in time, I see a bit of a do on the horizon, perhaps a tad after 4x4s and cheap flights, where to survive at the maximum numbers the planet can sustain (which will, sadly, have an upper limit no matter what choice of cuisine we are given – it will be fun to see who grabs the mantle of trading in this), it may be necessary to ban or price out certain key elements of our dietary lifestyles. Enjoy.
Solyent Green anyone?"
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Just make sure you wash them
Nothing wrong with this ad at all. It's very... 'green'But what does 'British Grown' mean, environmentally?
Especially when they may or may not get shipped to another country to be packed. And is grown in a heated bubble 400 miles away really that good?
That's the trouble with greenwashing. What you have done, or do elsewhere can stain the rest.
Frying pan. Fire. No food.
Go green, Farmer Giles
"As with so many things in environmental debates, I confess to suffering from a slight lack of objective, factual information to help me follow debates.
One issue involving the above that has generated concerns for me surrounds so-called bio-fuels.
I have a vision of, and hence problem with the notion of driving, carbon-neutrally, through our green (or whatever colour bio-fuel crops are) and pleasant land, trying to find something locally-produced to eat. Should we not be encouraging moves towards less transport and more local production of essentials?
While it may work for Brazil (on the assumption they haven't whacked down green-lung rain forests to do so), they have a tad more space to play with. Do we?
Given the option, I'd prefer to stick with food."
"As with so many things in environmental debates, I confess to suffering from a slight lack of objective, factual information to help me follow debates.
One issue involving the above that has generated concerns for me surrounds so-called bio-fuels.
I have a vision of, and hence problem with the notion of driving, carbon-neutrally, through our green (or whatever colour bio-fuel crops are) and pleasant land, trying to find something locally-produced to eat. Should we not be encouraging moves towards less transport and more local production of essentials?
While it may work for Brazil (on the assumption they haven't whacked down green-lung rain forests to do so), they have a tad more space to play with. Do we?
Given the option, I'd prefer to stick with food."
It's a gas, gas, gas
Couldn't resist: An Ill Wind
"For my sins, I once did two years of a vet degree, before deciding it was nothing like James Herriot and gave up. However, having witnessed my tutor stick a pipe in a heifer's exhaust and generate a jet of flame, I even then wondered if this could be harnessed (what does methane produce on combustion... I must find out. Carbon dioxide I bet), much like I wondered about those flames at oil refineries.
Meanwhile, back on the farm, if methane is 25 times more onerous a greenhouse gas to carbon dioxide, and the rest of the stats that will be bandied about (stated as fact, rebutted, climate denied, accused of being in the pay of big oil, accused of shoring up charity directors' pension funds, etc) approximate to something significant, then while it originates in humour it should be taken seriously.
I have hence decided to add a section to my website http://www.junkk.com on matters effluent, and it shall be called 'Pooh Corner'. It should entertain my ten-year-olds at least, but if they get some kind of message after the Beavis & Butthead snickers subside, it will be worth doing.
For what it's worth, a while ago I noted a small piece about some UK researchers, I think in Scotland, who had made serious progress on a feed that did in fact reduce the toots and, as mentioned above, make for a better 'product'. I’ll dig it out and add it.
Maybe we'll soon be seeing less of the 'Angus' burgers being advert, but more where the 'g' - standing for 'green', is silent?"
"For my sins, I once did two years of a vet degree, before deciding it was nothing like James Herriot and gave up. However, having witnessed my tutor stick a pipe in a heifer's exhaust and generate a jet of flame, I even then wondered if this could be harnessed (what does methane produce on combustion... I must find out. Carbon dioxide I bet), much like I wondered about those flames at oil refineries.
Meanwhile, back on the farm, if methane is 25 times more onerous a greenhouse gas to carbon dioxide, and the rest of the stats that will be bandied about (stated as fact, rebutted, climate denied, accused of being in the pay of big oil, accused of shoring up charity directors' pension funds, etc) approximate to something significant, then while it originates in humour it should be taken seriously.
I have hence decided to add a section to my website http://www.junkk.com on matters effluent, and it shall be called 'Pooh Corner'. It should entertain my ten-year-olds at least, but if they get some kind of message after the Beavis & Butthead snickers subside, it will be worth doing.
For what it's worth, a while ago I noted a small piece about some UK researchers, I think in Scotland, who had made serious progress on a feed that did in fact reduce the toots and, as mentioned above, make for a better 'product'. I’ll dig it out and add it.
Maybe we'll soon be seeing less of the 'Angus' burgers being advert, but more where the 'g' - standing for 'green', is silent?"
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Wild of the call
Cameron's 'buy British food' call
My take:
"A clear way to see what you are eating, where it came from and how it gets to you?
Logical. Simple. Effective.
Let's see when and if it ever happens, and how 'the system' makes it into an unworkable monster."
So far, so talk. I await with interest how any of this gets translated, if ever, into action.
A less thrilled view from Janet Street Porter
My take:
"A clear way to see what you are eating, where it came from and how it gets to you?
Logical. Simple. Effective.
Let's see when and if it ever happens, and how 'the system' makes it into an unworkable monster."
So far, so talk. I await with interest how any of this gets translated, if ever, into action.
A less thrilled view from Janet Street Porter
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)