Nice to have a soapbox provided

BBC - On the Oscars...

I really should record BBC Breakfast.

As I watch the ineffectual Newswatch (actually a few great questions posed, but as usual not answered in any effective way) with, irony of irony, Climate Change coverage (don't forget to watch, if not mention Ch4's 'Great Global Warming Swindle' next Thursday - as a climate change believer I would hope that it will not be deemed too boring to address with balance, but also diligence to ensure we are properly informed) followed by the commitment made, both in coverage terms AND resources (points well made here already here), with the 'fluff & froth' Oscars... Amazin' Kate, gosh, gush, amazin'.

I just got my latest 'We didn't do it. It wasn't a problem. And if it was what are you going to do?' from the show on my latest complaint as I watch the Saturday guest columnist (who I normally enjoy) mouth off on 'motorists'. He started off with a good point, but ended up being allowed to make, in my view prejudicial commentary.

I couldn't agree more with Mr. Fanshaw, that something fair, equitable... and national... needs to be done on road pricing.

But...

Can we presume that the rail system and connections in the South East from Brighton, to the BBC in London, and the compensation for same, may have resulted in a personal, privileged and unrepresentative view being broadcast without challenge?

Loved the dress... loved it.

Telling it like it is

Rail chief's overcrowding solution - don't travel

Actually, he's dead right. At least in the terms above (it gets a bit fudgier in the piece)

Bit of a tough sell though.

The richer are different to you and I. They attract more leeches.

I stumbled across this.

I almost wished I hadn't. Almost.

Beam me up, Sir Richard... why space tourism is no longer a sci-fi fantasy

Well, golly. How sooooooper, for you.

And any of this serves anyone, especially the planet... how?

Sickening.

Don't pity me on Petit St Vincent

Fly me to the moon. Or Not.

I have no problem with reasonable expenditures of pretty much anything in the cause of science.

Get a rich lard-a**se a better view... less so.

I’d like a ticket to New York by hypersonic space rocket, please

"The two organisations would research hybrid rocket motors, which
use both solid and liquid fuel and are safer and more efficient than
solid fuel rocket engines."

Just asking, but by 'more efficient' what is meant by that?

Will it mean a kilo of person or cargo will get to the destination
for a lower carbon commitment?

Or not?

And if not, this is a commitment to global warming how exactly?

Gush, gush journalism at its best.

Cross of Ross rides... er.. again (if not in a bus)

Who pays for free rides?

Can't win, can you?

If it's anything like this neck 'o the woods, free public travel would just
let 'em save up enough to get a G-reg 205 with more spent on the
sound system & exhaust than the brakes, to rush around leaving
floral decorations on county lamp-posts.

Meanwhile no one under or over a certain age is going to dare getting
on board public transport in the meantime

SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!

Here's the solution: road pricing. That'll sort it.

Or not.

This is more like it

Tour firm to make carbon offsetting mandatory

And if you don't happen to feel that their mandatory carbon offset system is helping you or your kids' future as much as some suit in the City currently blowing his bonus in a lap-dancing club on the back of the 'handling fee', then you can simply choose not to use them.

Or, not fly at all.

New Spin - Washes greener than green!

It all adds up. Or does it?

Calculating the carbon cost of business travel

I wonder how much calculating results in not doing in the first place.

Homeworking, video-conferencing, anyone?

Whacking a fir in the Gobi to compensate is not better than nothing, if and when the alternative of not travelling is available.

It will also make for a thinner travel section as you don't get to go to report on a Bali sap where the climate change delegates will go to relax. Or their ads.

But it does spoil the jollies some, luckier than others, enjoy.

ADDENDUM:

A very comprehensive post by EvilClanger, most of which I could not agree more with.

My only area of concern strays into the social costs of sledgehammer taxes, so I am reassured to see the word ‘graduated’ in the commercial tax calculation. I do get nervous by what seems a vaguely elitist, urban-centric view that those who live in the country all escaped there and enjoy a bohemian lifestyle. I’d venture many do not have the luxury of a penthouse in Canary Wharf, especially if they have families or don’t work in the City. I do believe it’s because that’s all they can afford.

ps: I think fur is now back ‘in’, probably featured in a gossip or style section near here.

What was one thinking?

Charles: let’s kill off the cul-de-sac

Open one's mouth (or have it opened for one).
Do not engage brain (well, that one's sorted then).
Issue Forth.
Stand back and get amazed at one's subjects' responses.

Does he really say these things? Or are they issued by his coterie of spinmeisters, all of whom seem to be a tad 'out of touch'.

We live on a main road. Our kids don't go out to play because it is too dangerous. Hence they play in the garden we are lucky enough to have, or get conveyed to their mates from school by car, repeat after me, because cycling at their age is...'.

I would live to live in a cul-de sac, as those that do seem to have thriving communities based on not being too worried about cars zooming past in the town areas as all the Gatsos are on a dual carriageway outside.

Tick 'dem boxes, meet 'dem targets!

Test to steer learners on a greener route

This is, of course, all good eco-stuff and any sensible embracing
of such advice and practice is to be encouraged. However, I do have a few
points/questions bearing in mind drivers are '...examined on their
knowledge of “eco-driving” techniques for reducing fuel consumption
and harmful emissions...'

2 - I am unclear on the point here. The faster you go the more fuel
you use, obviously. Are we to drive on motorways at 50mph to save fuel?

4 - Interesting. And this improves eco-driving how?

5 - Supertrams or LRTs are [more] environmentally friendly [than ?]
because electric power has [a greater eco-efficiency?]

It does make one wonder what the rest of the facts/questions are.

This is when to put your foot down

So, who is correct?

If it is JC, then surely people face the prospect of failing by giving
the correct answer?

Where and when do we see this proof?

And if proven, what happens next?

An eco-shredding of all the literature?

ps: I'm pretty sure driving at 150mph will get you somewhere quicker,
but possibly not home.

Telegraph Blog - Test, Tyres and Cat Litter

Chip & Pain

New e-passport may not travel well

Devilish detail, indeed. I watched this on TV this morning.
And I think I have identified the latest fudge word du jour: 'likely'.
Or in this case, 'not likely', as in the non-answer to the question as to
whether these things will last more than two years, what the US
immigration will do by way of a knock-back if it gets bust en route with
the friendly skies (if not destination), and if not who pays for the fix.
Now, when I buy something, it's good for a year. 3-5 on extended
warranty (surely this is not what they're planni... no, couldn't be). This
is because actuaries have assessed the viable lifespan of the product.
So... for this item I am forced to get, why the 8 year discrepancy? And
why the fudge? Trust is in short supply guys. If you really want to be
sure of that index-linked, gold-plated pension, I'd suggest you make
things work, and have real answers ready if not. Otherwise, what are
you for?

Slow can cost you

Oh well, at least only four people will read it.

I am afraid i got a bit ticked off with this: I'll take the slow road

I don't have a problem with people being rich. Or having eco-beliefs. Or indulging one with the other. But when it strays into 'I'm going to have a load of fun doing something most of you can't, and make out you could, and should' as the premise for a jolly, I see green (not envy, but a reddy-hued variety I reserve for the 'elite-set':

"I envy you. Have a good trip and more power to your elbow.

A whole year. Bliss.

I am reminded of a recent situation I faced. To support my free , no-consultancy-rates-here reuse website, http://www.junkk.com (which, though the odd naughty adsense may sneak by, tries to avoid booking rather contradictory air travel or 4x4 ads) I still try to keep the finances flowing with my creative collective http://www.firebird.com (ain't it great to get a plug in... a plus if you are paid to write, and even better sponsored big time to do so and supported by a major medium).

So there I was at a potential client's office. Being that they were in the eco-arena, I thought it enough that I'd planted a whole row of pansies along the back parcel shelf to offset, but no, she was not happy that, despite living but a few cities away, I had come to pitch in my R-reg Golf (car of choice for those who drive around the world I believe, and especially nice of a company like Shell to help - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2119306,00.html).

So I suggested a solution. The trip I'd made took about 20 minutes; 40 each way. Should I work for them I would of course travel by public transport which, at best, would bump that figure to at least 4 hrs. So if they’d pay me an extra 2hrs of my time we'd call it fair.

She didn't see that working. And so I am not either. At least for them. So I guess I will be taking the lappy on the camping trip again this year. Unless I can make some big dosh on a climate-saving gig and then blow it on a real holiday. Or... maybe fund an ‘adventure’ to share with my green elite mates.

It's tricky, see. Feeding the family AND doing your bit. For some of us.

So while, like our D2AID2AIS (don’t do as I do..) PM, it may be ‘impractical’ not to fly, there are those whose travel decisions are a matter of more immediate and pressing choices to daily life. And it’s probably best for those of us luckier than such hard-working, lowly-rewarded types to spare them a thought on our travels.

Which I'm sure you'll do. Say hi to my in-laws in Singapore when you're there.'

Irony is I know his company, and have tried to hook up... to littel reply. They make a load of money 'advising folk' and doing their communications in the eco-arena. Obviously enough to take a bit of time off to enjoy the spoils.

Oh, and that Golf trip I mentioned (bad link - my fault - lop off the bracket and point). Guess who does the eco-comms for Shell?

What goes around comes around, I guess. I wonder if he'll pumb into other media-luvvy eco-types while en route?

Carb-con

For the first time in a long time, I read a piece that seemed to pretty much say what I've been eyebrow-twitching, if not saying, for a while, and in quite calm, lucid and pragmatic terms: Planting trees won't offset jetting to the sun

I had to write:

'There's a certain irony to this headline as I watch my garden head to Oz (and I don't mean Botany Bay - great cartoon by Matt in The Telegraph on just this point, by the way).

Just wanted to say I agree with you. Which for a pretty committed 'green' may sound surprising. I see this issue as too much 'Carb-con jobs for the boys', and not enough doing what's necessary, right and fair.

I also like to see the issue(s) put as factually as possible, and in terms most if not all average folk can appreciate. Well done.

The rest of what you say is less easy to applaud, by simply being so true and unpalatable.

We do need leadership. Strong leadership. And by example (I'm almost afraid to point you at this). Plus we need sensible media support. This is the first I've seen in a while.

Thank you.'

Now, I wonder, will the 'Anon' dogs of PR and lobbyists appear from to savage this debate into further deadlock and inertia?

Indy: Carbon offsetting 'can be harmful'
BBC

All that's Green... need not be?

I was interested in a new travel initiative called Greenbee, from John Lewis Partnership, for whom I have a high regard on several counts.

Sadly, it was not what I thought it would be. Tap in environment to the search, and this is the closest you get.

Interesting name, though. I wonder what lies behind it?