... and I have managed to become the anti-christ of two extremes of the 'climate' debate.
Simultaneously!
I could see where this was going...
The BBC’s amazing U-turn on climate change
...and decided to pitch in and make a case for the middle ground (whilst trying to point out to the extremes that the whole issue is highly complex and waaay above petty tribal tallies... such as trying to claim a single BBC report is a 'U-turn'*) but also firmly staking out how I think it is too important to be left any more to the various protagonists who have pitched in so far.
Of course it is but a small aspect of a very complex overall debate.
However, it comes at a point when public trust is being demanded from some quarters that have less than stellar records in this regard, in the run up to some fairly honking great decisions with some hefty, long term price tags attached.
I personally believe the climate is changing, and for the worse, and that ‘we’ sure as heck are not helping so it’s well worth proceeding with caution and mitigating sensibly wherever and whenever we can.
Just as the penned words of one media employee mean diddly squat to the totality, what I write here is NOT support for the ‘all is fine’ brigade to keep on as they have, but I fully concede that a few rather high profile, possibly well-meaning eco types have tried to have their cake and eat it, and it’s gone off.
We need new advocates. But seeing how comfortable most of the ‘green elite’ have become, I am not hopeful.
Because I believe, to date, the communication of the issues to the public (who are key) have been totally mismanaged by usually self-selected cabals in support of often unelected but usually totally inept / scientifically -ignorant / lobbyphilic / target-centric complementary boxtickocracies in the politico / activist / quango / media establishment who can come up with such as this:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6867046.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=1515793
‘Climate change sceptics are to be targeted in a hard-hitting [£6M - that would buy a lot of winter insulation, just as $35M from some other awareness-addicted clowns would buy a few water wells http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8300374.stm ] government advertising campaign that will be the first to state unequivocally that Man is causing global warming and endangering life on Earth.
If the Copenhagen missions from other countries are guided by equal groupings, then the planet is well and truly stuffed.
You persuade through the power of your argument and being honest, un-hypocritical and clear with your audience. The powers that be are now highly compromised in this regard, having been mostly addicted to policies of fine, frighten, guilt and threat too often in pursuit of power and control over legitimate issues of concern that do need addressing. And have been waaaay too cavalier in boosting anything that served their causes. Especially whilst conveniently ignoring a bunch of other stuff which was either too hard or didn’t involve a tariff or taxable offset.
http://www.panda.org/wwf_news/news/?uNewsID=176141
http://www.thegoodhuman.com/2009/10/11/how-much-rainforest-is-destroyed-each-day/
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/10/european-union-corrupt-african-governments-block-stronger-redd-scheme.php?dcitc=th_rss
And now it’s all coming back to bite ‘em on the tush they’ll be screaming ist/zi/inger like Milliband. D when he doesn’t get the pudding he wanted at his birthday party.
I want a better planet for my kids, but I am not prepared to consign them to living it in a small box eating Soylent Green and not going anywhere. Because all that mindset buys is a bit more time.
We need better, more creative minds on this.
All the current batch have managed to do is to make my job a ton more difficult, as I spend all my waking hours DOING stuff on ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies.
It’s saving planet AND pocket. But even with those clear plusses the audience needs to feel the effort is worth it. Stuff like this either confuses them or puts them off, and gets the door slammed in my face, and those like me.
I can already feel the ‘traitor to the cause’ knives sharpening, but crushing other views has backfired at near every turn, and I think, for the sake of my kids, to save the tree we need to cut out the dead wood and start again.
Heaven knows how, but the alternative status quo under the current regimes is a dead-end creek that stinks.
It got noticed, but not always in a good way:( So I hope this comes across as suitably firm in rejection of partisan demands, but fair:
I have a a dream, and that is meeting the Marketing Director Kellogg’s to pitch my idea for making all their cereal packs reusable.
And I’ll kick off by saying ‘It would all just be junk but for that extra Special K’
That way everyone involved (brand, customer and me) can make money and help the future.
I prefer to go for incentive and reward. Seems to be more reliable.
If you’d like to debate any points I’m making I’m cool. But if it’s playing with names and my calling… not so much.
Just off a BBC post board where some climate change ‘enthusiasts’ (hard to get a snappy descriptor that is accurate and/or not a silly pejorative) reckon those who don’t follow their ‘way’ blindly need to be jailed.
It gets heated. And it seems like too many prefer that to illumination.
Not interested.
Ah well, off now to visit Mum in her home to tell her all we have done this week with Junkk and are going to DO next. Peace will reign. Briefly.
Nowt like being an equal opportunity offender.
*Telegraph
One swallow does not a summer make.
So I do wonder if it is fair, or accurate, to totally project the reporting of but one employee onto the ‘views’ of a corporation, not that ‘they’ should have ‘views’ one way or t’other in the first place. part of the problem, I suspect.
As one interested, I am not clear as to Mr. Hudson’s status, at least as ‘its’ climate change correspondent.
There are surely others in the ‘reporting/corresponding/editing mix (Harrabin, Black, etc), so do they enjoy other, semantically different and hence significant titles, and no specific brief on this odd, rather hard to pin-down entity… climate change?
There is however significance to be sure to be read into the fact that this solo chap’s piece has been seen to stray from… well… best not to get into that.
I sense others have the time and energy to square off on the consequences in days to come.
Addendum: Yet more form the funny farm. There really seems a need on the parst of soem that you offer total fealty to their respective religions. Spooky.
In this day and age, is having your own mind so scary to some?
Still with worrying about the who and less worried with the what of the discussion, eh?
Oddly, just like that other interesting bunch over at Richard Black's (another BBC green/eco climate/whatever reporter/correspendent/editor/whatever (I am sure the difference matters... to someone) who seem so emboldened with the... ahem.. 'success' of a certain Ms. Abbess with Roger Harrabin (another BBC, etc) they seem to figure they, and only they are 'the way', and any dissent is to be dealt with harshly.
I tend to follow a less certain, less dogmatic line. And in a sad era of a need to belong to a tribe, it's my own.
The extra feedback JustinXS and geofftheref on the main protagonist is appreciated and encouraging. I have long had more than a concern that events were being interpreted, narratives enhanced and represenations made fair by folk whose popular reach was not quite matched by their qualifications in matters of scientific investigation and explanation. Mr. Hudson seems a rare, and most welcome exception to the 'rule'. Still just 'a' bloke, mind.
Can't speak for t'other (seems very nice) fellow I seem to be associated with coincidentally on the basis of no more than names with two k's, but since you asked so nicely... oh.. you didn't.
So, sorry, cannot find it in me to oblige:)
It's kind of weird to find myself as an equal opportunity 'offender', as by my stance I seem to have incurred the attention, and ire, of both climate optimists AND pessimists (the best non-judgmental descriptor I can muster for the two bookend camps for whom 'you are either with us or against us' seem shared mantras) simultaneously.
Which is quite a feat, if one thinks about it.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Inspiration is the worthiest form of flattery
30 Clever And Creative Package Designs
So much already done, so much more to do...
Dumbells
Characters
Christmas Decorations
...so little (if still too ahead of our) time.
Well, at least our message is spreading:)
So much already done, so much more to do...
Dumbells
Characters
Christmas Decorations
...so little (if still too ahead of our) time.
Well, at least our message is spreading:)
Compare and contrast
EU Sides with Corrupt African Governments to Block Stronger REDD Forest Protection Scheme
Saving forests five times better than carbon capture for climate action: WWF Sweden.
But some clown blows $35M (that's a lot of wells) on raising awareness atop a column of greenhouse gasses, and it's wall to wall on the media.
'Space clown' hosts show from ISS
Saving forests five times better than carbon capture for climate action: WWF Sweden.
But some clown blows $35M (that's a lot of wells) on raising awareness atop a column of greenhouse gasses, and it's wall to wall on the media.
'Space clown' hosts show from ISS
QUOTE OF THE DAY - If you're happy and you know it...
... you're an engineer! Does 'ex' count?
Or do I still qualify as I still design and make things?
Dyson answers the call to fill a vacuum in British life
“But only 16 per cent of engineers are unhappy in their careers, compared with 44 per cent of journalists and 25 per cent of medics. We need to show it’s respectable to make money out of making things, not just shuffling money around.”
Or do I still qualify as I still design and make things?
Dyson answers the call to fill a vacuum in British life
“But only 16 per cent of engineers are unhappy in their careers, compared with 44 per cent of journalists and 25 per cent of medics. We need to show it’s respectable to make money out of making things, not just shuffling money around.”
About that incentive thing...
As many will know, I am not big on nanny, fine, guilt, scare, etc.
Tories will lend every household £6,500 to save energy and make money
Slightly better than blowing £6M on 'awareness'?
But...
Then look at the comments. That's against 'finding' £1.65B to fund it. Hence, a bit hard to grasp on how it will work. Only another £1B to go.
Interesting how the feedback is almost unremittingly negative, in a Conservative-friendly paper.
But I think this one at least shows an interest in looking in more productive directions.
Tories will lend every household £6,500 to save energy and make money
Slightly better than blowing £6M on 'awareness'?
But...
Then look at the comments. That's against 'finding' £1.65B to fund it. Hence, a bit hard to grasp on how it will work. Only another £1B to go.
Interesting how the feedback is almost unremittingly negative, in a Conservative-friendly paper.
But I think this one at least shows an interest in looking in more productive directions.
Friday, October 09, 2009
Hmnnnn...
Ministers target climate change doubters in prime-time TV advert
This may not end well. No matter how well intentioned.
Climate change sceptics are to be targeted in a hard-hitting government advertising campaign that will be the first to state unequivocally that Man is causing global warming and endangering life on Earth.
The £6 million campaign, which begins tonight in the prime ITV1 slot during Coronation Street, is a direct response to government research showing that more than half the population think that climate change will have no effect on them.
Ministers sanctioned the campaign because of concern that scepticism about climate change was making it harder to introduce carbon-reducing policies such as higher energy bills.
My emphasis points.
That's quite a set of words, especially if from the PR.
As to the commercial... well... I'll reserve creative commentary. But there's a certain irony that I saw it preceded by a consumer-driven message that is, at the end of the da... world... 'buy more stuff'.
Addendum 1:
Just watching it being 'promoted' on BBC Breakfast News: the commercial that aims to scare us into taking climate change seriously. Yup, this 'un will do it. And scaring has worked great so far. But maybe doing it with kids might be a better line of attack.
Addendum 2:
Energy Minister Joan Ruddock on now explaining it helps people 'understand climate change' and 'makes it clearer'. In which case: #Major Fail! The woman is a classic poor messenger for this message. She has no clue. On science... or communications. And this is who we have steering our efforts to a greener Britain
Addendum 3:
Telegraph - Government's £6 million 'Bedtime Story' climate change ad: most pernicious waste of taxpayers' money ever?
Last time I was subjected to one of these 'awareness' fests (board bonuses seem to be measured on whether the box marked 'Yes I saw it' gets ticked by another quango's research team, which makes blowing money on comms budgets to drive up said bonuses a tad unethical, conflict of interest wise...IMHO) by some other eco-quango diverting money from DOING something useful (like helping poor and/or old folk with things like insulation), it was also rather directed at the audience you suggest.
Never got a reply to my question back then as to why the white, middle class family of four were off to buy their pack of four eco-bulbs in a stonking great big, black Porsche Cayenne Turbo S 4x4, when it looked like they were greening up the des res from Wandsworth B&Q to leafy Fulham. Possibly with a 'my other car is a Prius to beat the Congestion Charge' sticker in the back window, as electric cars are 'green'.... apparently, because the juice comes from... er... um...
I rather suspect that, to save a bit of dosh on house and car rental for the TVC, the producer/directors donated their pads and favoured modes of urban transport to 'help'. Nice bit of reuse, perhaps, but a smidge light on the irony front.
Still, speaking of clowns blowing money on targets, or looking good to your mates in the green elite section of the VIP lounge come the next 'concert' it could be worse... it could have been $35M blown to sit atop a column of Russian greenhouse gasses... well, well, well, well, well... not.
ps: while I think they have at last decided to look beyond reprinting press releases from agenda-comfortable sources (a bit late to be taken seriously or regain any trust, mind), I do think one 'non-solely anthro concessionary' article by one (albeit better qualified than most so far) science reporting employee is getting stretched a bit to become a "U-turn' by Aunty.
But, yes, almost Brownian in timing.
And you would think that about the bunnies, wouldn't you? Maybe they were eaten by all the alligators splashing around Gothenburg in the school project diorama Milibands D. & E. took with them to scare those easily scared types in the EU foreign ministries recently. I wonder if they got Gerry Anderson in on it all... at taxpayer's expense, natch.
green thing - NEW - Mad World - Another view. I am unsure if two wrongs justify anything. And when an ad states something as fact which is not, yet, much as some might find it helpful to be, it's not mad, it's reality, however unpalatable. And, yet again, I find myself expected to accept an analogy that is flawed. Also interesting to note the party affiliation, too.
Looking at the forces ranged around this latest icon, has it helped or merely added fuel to a distracting fire?
BBC - NEW - 'Scary' UK climate ad faces probe - a balanced piece IMHO
Treehugger - NEW - Climate Change TV Ad Under Investigation for Scaring Kids - Also balanced, though I think the responding readers took what they wanted from it. Not worth entering the lion's den by pondering the impact on sensible debate of it possibly being pulled for being factually challenged (if successful). Mr. Gore's last schoolkid outing did sooo well on that count.
Telegraph - NEW - Government TV climate ad is propaganda
Of course it is propaganda... pretty much by definition any advertising to us (ironically funded by us), by government to suit agendas, influence opinion, alter behaviours surely has to, doesn't it? By no stretch do most I see 'impartially provide information'.
And in the spirit of 'one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter' I suspect most either agree, disagree, don't care or let it wash over.
I reckon having the odd 'Boo!' can be effective and tend to tolerate 'em. And suspect most others do to. Which is why it's kinda cute this is being made about being 'scary' after the watershed.
What does get interesting is the factual basis. In my day it was called 'legal, decent, honest and truthful'. Not quite so clear what the ASA works on nowadays, but it will be interesting to see how it stands up.
Because in the PR that went with its launch there was such as this...(above):
After a similar such outing, I think involving the courts, by such as Mr. Gore's school effort, and how that worked out, if the factual basis of this effort is found wanting, I dread to think the damage done, yet again, to sensible environmental advocacy.
If these are the calibre of folk who think they are best suited to make my kids' futures better, and how they see the mission best projected, god help the planet if they end up dealing with grown-ups in Copenhagen.
Teblog - NEW - Frighten the kids, or encourage the grown-ups? Insightful
This may not end well. No matter how well intentioned.
Climate change sceptics are to be targeted in a hard-hitting government advertising campaign that will be the first to state unequivocally that Man is causing global warming and endangering life on Earth.
The £6 million campaign, which begins tonight in the prime ITV1 slot during Coronation Street, is a direct response to government research showing that more than half the population think that climate change will have no effect on them.
Ministers sanctioned the campaign because of concern that scepticism about climate change was making it harder to introduce carbon-reducing policies such as higher energy bills.
My emphasis points.
That's quite a set of words, especially if from the PR.
As to the commercial... well... I'll reserve creative commentary. But there's a certain irony that I saw it preceded by a consumer-driven message that is, at the end of the da... world... 'buy more stuff'.
Addendum 1:
Just watching it being 'promoted' on BBC Breakfast News: the commercial that aims to scare us into taking climate change seriously. Yup, this 'un will do it. And scaring has worked great so far. But maybe doing it with kids might be a better line of attack.
Addendum 2:
Energy Minister Joan Ruddock on now explaining it helps people 'understand climate change' and 'makes it clearer'. In which case: #Major Fail! The woman is a classic poor messenger for this message. She has no clue. On science... or communications. And this is who we have steering our efforts to a greener Britain
Addendum 3:
Telegraph - Government's £6 million 'Bedtime Story' climate change ad: most pernicious waste of taxpayers' money ever?
Last time I was subjected to one of these 'awareness' fests (board bonuses seem to be measured on whether the box marked 'Yes I saw it' gets ticked by another quango's research team, which makes blowing money on comms budgets to drive up said bonuses a tad unethical, conflict of interest wise...IMHO) by some other eco-quango diverting money from DOING something useful (like helping poor and/or old folk with things like insulation), it was also rather directed at the audience you suggest.
Never got a reply to my question back then as to why the white, middle class family of four were off to buy their pack of four eco-bulbs in a stonking great big, black Porsche Cayenne Turbo S 4x4, when it looked like they were greening up the des res from Wandsworth B&Q to leafy Fulham. Possibly with a 'my other car is a Prius to beat the Congestion Charge' sticker in the back window, as electric cars are 'green'.... apparently, because the juice comes from... er... um...
I rather suspect that, to save a bit of dosh on house and car rental for the TVC, the producer/directors donated their pads and favoured modes of urban transport to 'help'. Nice bit of reuse, perhaps, but a smidge light on the irony front.
Still, speaking of clowns blowing money on targets, or looking good to your mates in the green elite section of the VIP lounge come the next 'concert' it could be worse... it could have been $35M blown to sit atop a column of Russian greenhouse gasses... well, well, well, well, well... not.
ps: while I think they have at last decided to look beyond reprinting press releases from agenda-comfortable sources (a bit late to be taken seriously or regain any trust, mind), I do think one 'non-solely anthro concessionary' article by one (albeit better qualified than most so far) science reporting employee is getting stretched a bit to become a "U-turn' by Aunty.
But, yes, almost Brownian in timing.
And you would think that about the bunnies, wouldn't you? Maybe they were eaten by all the alligators splashing around Gothenburg in the school project diorama Milibands D. & E. took with them to scare those easily scared types in the EU foreign ministries recently. I wonder if they got Gerry Anderson in on it all... at taxpayer's expense, natch.
green thing - NEW - Mad World - Another view. I am unsure if two wrongs justify anything. And when an ad states something as fact which is not, yet, much as some might find it helpful to be, it's not mad, it's reality, however unpalatable. And, yet again, I find myself expected to accept an analogy that is flawed. Also interesting to note the party affiliation, too.
Looking at the forces ranged around this latest icon, has it helped or merely added fuel to a distracting fire?
BBC - NEW - 'Scary' UK climate ad faces probe - a balanced piece IMHO
Treehugger - NEW - Climate Change TV Ad Under Investigation for Scaring Kids - Also balanced, though I think the responding readers took what they wanted from it. Not worth entering the lion's den by pondering the impact on sensible debate of it possibly being pulled for being factually challenged (if successful). Mr. Gore's last schoolkid outing did sooo well on that count.
Telegraph - NEW - Government TV climate ad is propaganda
Of course it is propaganda... pretty much by definition any advertising to us (ironically funded by us), by government to suit agendas, influence opinion, alter behaviours surely has to, doesn't it? By no stretch do most I see 'impartially provide information'.
And in the spirit of 'one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter' I suspect most either agree, disagree, don't care or let it wash over.
I reckon having the odd 'Boo!' can be effective and tend to tolerate 'em. And suspect most others do to. Which is why it's kinda cute this is being made about being 'scary' after the watershed.
What does get interesting is the factual basis. In my day it was called 'legal, decent, honest and truthful'. Not quite so clear what the ASA works on nowadays, but it will be interesting to see how it stands up.
Because in the PR that went with its launch there was such as this...(above):
After a similar such outing, I think involving the courts, by such as Mr. Gore's school effort, and how that worked out, if the factual basis of this effort is found wanting, I dread to think the damage done, yet again, to sensible environmental advocacy.
If these are the calibre of folk who think they are best suited to make my kids' futures better, and how they see the mission best projected, god help the planet if they end up dealing with grown-ups in Copenhagen.
Teblog - NEW - Frighten the kids, or encourage the grown-ups? Insightful
The first jummy of autumn
Iiiii wwwwwwilll resist pppputting the hhhhheating on.
Iiiii wwwwwwilll resist pppputting the hhhhheating on.
Iiiii wwwwwwilll resist pppputting the hhhhheating on.
(plus get a shave, bathe, haircut and lose 20kg)
PR COVERAGE - Blooming great!
Just wish they'd spelled the name right!Many either use 'junk' or 'junnk'
To late to change now.
But welcome coverage.
With luck, more to come.
A headline to savour 2
And what... is not to like?
Move Over Recycling: Creative Reuse Is Dethroning You as the More Impactful 3R
Move Over Recycling: Creative Reuse Is Dethroning You as the More Impactful 3R
Mixed feelings
Junkk was set up with help from a variety of quarters.
Mostly grants. Though I was mainly looking for assistance in areas to complement those I had, and those I definitely lack.
I have lost count of the number of BusinessLinks, UNLtds and other assorted quangos my business model and plan went through.
Sometimes it worked, and I go some money... and a box got ticked. And then they moved on. Giving out money and ticking boxes seemed, and still seems the order of the day.
What I was, am and seek to DO always seemed to pass these geniuses by, with their P&Ls, forward forecasting and 'Widgets from Wigan' mentalities (it needs to be a 'thing' that you buy for 50p, sell for £1, and can turn around in a month, and you'll be on a subsidised trip to Taiwan before you can say match funding) is look at the future, and long term ways to make a difference... and make money too, if I can.
And one of the very first, and most fundamental aspects of the Junkk.com plan was, is and always will be to see rubbish as a resource.
And I set out from day one on this basis, with a view to harnessing the power of the internet, and the principles of incentive and reward via this medium, to motivate 'better' environmental practices by the consuming public.
That aspect was never appreciated by the money folk, nor the quangocrats, especially those with all this 'experience' in social enterprise.
So I look with envy, over the pond, at this:
Terracycle (no more space to add a label:(
They are getting there, because they, and others around them, have 'got it'.
I just hope after 10 years of plugging away here, I an make it happen in the UK too.
We have certain advantages. I think Junkk.com adds a sense of fun to it all, but we also have a built-in searchable database and postcode location sytem that can easily connect people looking and offering.
I have often been told I am 'ahead of my time'. To date, it has been a curse... I want, need to be of it. But I am determined that my vision will yet be fulfilled, and 'Rubbish need not be a dirty word'.
Mostly grants. Though I was mainly looking for assistance in areas to complement those I had, and those I definitely lack.
I have lost count of the number of BusinessLinks, UNLtds and other assorted quangos my business model and plan went through.
Sometimes it worked, and I go some money... and a box got ticked. And then they moved on. Giving out money and ticking boxes seemed, and still seems the order of the day.
What I was, am and seek to DO always seemed to pass these geniuses by, with their P&Ls, forward forecasting and 'Widgets from Wigan' mentalities (it needs to be a 'thing' that you buy for 50p, sell for £1, and can turn around in a month, and you'll be on a subsidised trip to Taiwan before you can say match funding) is look at the future, and long term ways to make a difference... and make money too, if I can.
And one of the very first, and most fundamental aspects of the Junkk.com plan was, is and always will be to see rubbish as a resource.
And I set out from day one on this basis, with a view to harnessing the power of the internet, and the principles of incentive and reward via this medium, to motivate 'better' environmental practices by the consuming public.
That aspect was never appreciated by the money folk, nor the quangocrats, especially those with all this 'experience' in social enterprise.
So I look with envy, over the pond, at this:
Terracycle (no more space to add a label:(
They are getting there, because they, and others around them, have 'got it'.
I just hope after 10 years of plugging away here, I an make it happen in the UK too.
We have certain advantages. I think Junkk.com adds a sense of fun to it all, but we also have a built-in searchable database and postcode location sytem that can easily connect people looking and offering.
I have often been told I am 'ahead of my time'. To date, it has been a curse... I want, need to be of it. But I am determined that my vision will yet be fulfilled, and 'Rubbish need not be a dirty word'.
POOH CORNER - If you think about it...
...which I would not blame you for not doing:
Nippon Airlines Asks You to Please "Lighten Your Load" Pre-Board
The composting toilet idea might be fun, except for the guys under the flight path.
Now, about not packing 500% more luggage than you actually need...
Nippon Airlines Asks You to Please "Lighten Your Load" Pre-Board
The composting toilet idea might be fun, except for the guys under the flight path.
Now, about not packing 500% more luggage than you actually need...
Thursday, October 08, 2009
PROF'S POSER - Long & slow or on, off and up?
First really nippy day of the year.
Well, this morning.
Now, with the sun... glorious.
Missus well happy at the 7am central heating kick-of and blissfully unaware that it goes off at 9am until 5pm, when it kicks in again until bedtime.
I noticed, at around 10am. Hence the jummy.
Thing is, am I doing the right thing?
As with the immerser, is it better to have it on all day, albeit 'ticking' over, or have two bursts to top and tail the day?
What is best for the overall thermal performance of a thick stone-walled building?
Well, this morning.
Now, with the sun... glorious.
Missus well happy at the 7am central heating kick-of and blissfully unaware that it goes off at 9am until 5pm, when it kicks in again until bedtime.
I noticed, at around 10am. Hence the jummy.
Thing is, am I doing the right thing?
As with the immerser, is it better to have it on all day, albeit 'ticking' over, or have two bursts to top and tail the day?
What is best for the overall thermal performance of a thick stone-walled building?
Not to mention....
...oh go on then.. reuse!
UK losing £650m a year by binning and burning waste
Even less impacting on the environment. doesn't require the public to work free for others/targets/bonusses, can save oodles of munny and... is well fun!
UK losing £650m a year by binning and burning waste
Even less impacting on the environment. doesn't require the public to work free for others/targets/bonusses, can save oodles of munny and... is well fun!
What goes up , might not be a downer
Well, not as much of one.
What, exactly, makes a rocket fuel environmentally friendly?
I think, as with many headlines, adding an 'er' might be more accurate.
But any step in the right direction must be welcome.
At least it seems a tad more credible than some of the claims made by such as Virgin Galactic (and which have attracted a few eyebrow cranks of mine).
Exploration is necessary, so mitigating the consequences is the best option.
What, exactly, makes a rocket fuel environmentally friendly?
I think, as with many headlines, adding an 'er' might be more accurate.
But any step in the right direction must be welcome.
At least it seems a tad more credible than some of the claims made by such as Virgin Galactic (and which have attracted a few eyebrow cranks of mine).
Exploration is necessary, so mitigating the consequences is the best option.
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Getting there...
Yesterday started in the pits.
I was being stalked by a nutter on a BBC blog, the boiler didn't work, the washing machine repair was 2 weeks' off, it was raining... and I was staring at a potential 'efinsaftee disaster to my proposed stand to next week.
Fire regs on non-certificated plastics.
Notwithstanding that any Junkk stand is usually 95% plastic junk anyway, this was going to be a real issue.
Anyway, in the course of the day the nutter got modded (might be back mind), the boiler fixed (on insurance), the washing machine fixed (on insurance) thanks to me being a home worker and getting a cancellation, the sun shone again, and.... the lovely organisers of BIS said they had no problem with my stand proposal. Especially as it is made from two reused climbing frames the boys are two old for.
Now all I have to do is figure out what to put in it, on it and around it, and then get it all to London to set up in a few hours on the 13th.
Data Day
Postcodes: Adam Crozier letter
From MP Tom Watson.
From me:
I will follow this issue with interest: thank you for raising it. And for pursuing it further.
I think a nice balance between sympathetic commercial realism and community challenge on matters of 'public' data.
My website has a postcode location facility to help, amongst other things, people to locate each other to facilitate reuse swaps, etc.
I think I paid for that, a long while ago.
Now many folk, especially new registrants, are complaining that their postcodes 'don't work'. I'm guessing boundary changes or additions.
Now as a commercial business I can see how things that take money to create need to be compensated, but I do get interested when the ways such data are gleaned are less clearly defined.
And, as stated above, when there is a clear public benefit to having access to information about themselves.
I believe the Guardian has been on this case also for quite a while: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/free-our-data
Taking a tip from another poster, as Junkk.com also finds itself followed in, but (until now, for monetary reasons, poorly serving) the USA, this is pretty significant, and cheering:
Federal Register in XML
From MP Tom Watson.
From me:
I will follow this issue with interest: thank you for raising it. And for pursuing it further.
I think a nice balance between sympathetic commercial realism and community challenge on matters of 'public' data.
My website has a postcode location facility to help, amongst other things, people to locate each other to facilitate reuse swaps, etc.
I think I paid for that, a long while ago.
Now many folk, especially new registrants, are complaining that their postcodes 'don't work'. I'm guessing boundary changes or additions.
Now as a commercial business I can see how things that take money to create need to be compensated, but I do get interested when the ways such data are gleaned are less clearly defined.
And, as stated above, when there is a clear public benefit to having access to information about themselves.
I believe the Guardian has been on this case also for quite a while: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/free-our-data
Taking a tip from another poster, as Junkk.com also finds itself followed in, but (until now, for monetary reasons, poorly serving) the USA, this is pretty significant, and cheering:
Federal Register in XML
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
Bang goes my audience?
Apparently the passwords of hotmail account holders have been compromised.
Now, which single grouping is the greatest sign-ups to Junkk.com?
And of which grouping who is least likely to inform us of a change of email addy?
Which I rather suspect they will do, along with a possibly compromised password.
And that... means we will be unable to get any future comms, such as newsletters, to them.
Brilliant:(
BBC - Top G-man in Phishing scam
Now, which single grouping is the greatest sign-ups to Junkk.com?
And of which grouping who is least likely to inform us of a change of email addy?
Which I rather suspect they will do, along with a possibly compromised password.
And that... means we will be unable to get any future comms, such as newsletters, to them.
Brilliant:(
BBC - Top G-man in Phishing scam
IRONY ALERT - Aunty says switch off. Not her, of course
Watching (on a PIP on my PC) Breakfast BBC News.
Just loved the way they intro'd a piece on an energy saving story about the Isles of Scilly.
'What one thing could you switch off now?'...pause... 'Er... not the TV of course'.
First image I see? A person switching off her TV.
Always a bit dubious about 'days', and this one seems no different. However, it did gain the community some PR to share notions like not running a power shower for 5 minutes before getting in it.
O....k.
Actually, all this energy awareness seems to be spinning on its own axis to me. Not that any that is shared is in any way not worth knowing, but there is a ton of money saying very few, blooming obvious things and... over and over. Good enviROI?
Just look at the latest EST ad that this would appear to be coinciding with.
If not having a bath and switching down your fridge is the best they can do after all this time, I think the money could really have been spent better elsewhere, on issues where folk may well be persuaded by pragmatic advice.
Addendum - the event site, sadly not shared by the national broadcaster. Interesting stuff, if a bit 'busy'
Just loved the way they intro'd a piece on an energy saving story about the Isles of Scilly.
'What one thing could you switch off now?'...pause... 'Er... not the TV of course'.
First image I see? A person switching off her TV.
Always a bit dubious about 'days', and this one seems no different. However, it did gain the community some PR to share notions like not running a power shower for 5 minutes before getting in it.
O....k.
Actually, all this energy awareness seems to be spinning on its own axis to me. Not that any that is shared is in any way not worth knowing, but there is a ton of money saying very few, blooming obvious things and... over and over. Good enviROI?
Just look at the latest EST ad that this would appear to be coinciding with.
If not having a bath and switching down your fridge is the best they can do after all this time, I think the money could really have been spent better elsewhere, on issues where folk may well be persuaded by pragmatic advice.
Addendum - the event site, sadly not shared by the national broadcaster. Interesting stuff, if a bit 'busy'
Monday, October 05, 2009
QUOTE OF THE DAY - And proud of it
Just heard on SKY News*
Guest commentator: "I'm afraid I don't get science"
Anchor: "Yes, well, I guess that is why we became journalists"
Ne'er a truer word. Sadly.
*Discussing 'elfinsaftee removing yet more experimentation opportunities to inspire students, this time in Chemistry.
Guest commentator: "I'm afraid I don't get science"
Anchor: "Yes, well, I guess that is why we became journalists"
Ne'er a truer word. Sadly.
*Discussing 'elfinsaftee removing yet more experimentation opportunities to inspire students, this time in Chemistry.
Knowledge is power
sourcemap.org
'Simply put: We believe that people have the right to know where things come from and what they are made of. '
Can't argue with that.
Hope it is accurate, mind.
'Simply put: We believe that people have the right to know where things come from and what they are made of. '
Can't argue with that.
Hope it is accurate, mind.
By example
British public refuse to fly less to reduce their carbon footprint
In many ways the headline is a perfect encapsulation of what I see as a significant issue.
'The British public...' is an odd bunch.
A 'them' that another 'us' seem to see as not cooperating despite near daily nags from those who somehow still don't find it ironic to be constantly climbing aboard (usually to wallow in the front) of aircraft to fly all about (usually to nice places) to either talk about climate, raise 'awareness' or, in the case of many media, stand in front of stuff to decry how flying is doing so much damage.
Even the Guardian is not immune, and of course is famously reluctant to drop lucrative ads suggesting its readers visit far flung places before the actions 'of others' ruin them.
And only yesterday I learn that Dame Ellen MacArthur is to give up sailing for climate change (sic) promotion. I doubt she will be do this exclusively using water-borne free air, which might lead to suggestions of hot air. 'Doing one's job' has consequences, and there is a certain arrogance in a reporter or campaigner (I can concede most pols, though Mr. Prescott took his commitments a tad far... and long) somehow figuring their 'job' is necessary and others are not.
I flew a lot in my Asia days, and I did not do it for fun. Crossing time zones in a stuffy metal tube will never be.
And when it comes to social travel I think we would need to change human nature first. The desire to go other places is ingrained. Which can only mean that the trend will be to making it unaffordable to any but... yes... a grouping I think all ready well represented above. Another social divide that cannot end well.
Just in my personal case, with half our family halfway around the world, it's already an ethical dilemma for those who care about such things, on top of a financial burden enough for those with no choice.
But when the government's latest climate quangocrat reckons he and his family might have to cut back on the long hauls...which they do for fun, annually... there is already a disconnect between the 'do as we says' and the rest. We're saving up to visit in the next few years.
So long as that is not appreciated by the nannies, I don't see much changing.
In many ways the headline is a perfect encapsulation of what I see as a significant issue.
'The British public...' is an odd bunch.
A 'them' that another 'us' seem to see as not cooperating despite near daily nags from those who somehow still don't find it ironic to be constantly climbing aboard (usually to wallow in the front) of aircraft to fly all about (usually to nice places) to either talk about climate, raise 'awareness' or, in the case of many media, stand in front of stuff to decry how flying is doing so much damage.
Even the Guardian is not immune, and of course is famously reluctant to drop lucrative ads suggesting its readers visit far flung places before the actions 'of others' ruin them.
And only yesterday I learn that Dame Ellen MacArthur is to give up sailing for climate change (sic) promotion. I doubt she will be do this exclusively using water-borne free air, which might lead to suggestions of hot air. 'Doing one's job' has consequences, and there is a certain arrogance in a reporter or campaigner (I can concede most pols, though Mr. Prescott took his commitments a tad far... and long) somehow figuring their 'job' is necessary and others are not.
I flew a lot in my Asia days, and I did not do it for fun. Crossing time zones in a stuffy metal tube will never be.
And when it comes to social travel I think we would need to change human nature first. The desire to go other places is ingrained. Which can only mean that the trend will be to making it unaffordable to any but... yes... a grouping I think all ready well represented above. Another social divide that cannot end well.
Just in my personal case, with half our family halfway around the world, it's already an ethical dilemma for those who care about such things, on top of a financial burden enough for those with no choice.
But when the government's latest climate quangocrat reckons he and his family might have to cut back on the long hauls...which they do for fun, annually... there is already a disconnect between the 'do as we says' and the rest. We're saving up to visit in the next few years.
So long as that is not appreciated by the nannies, I don't see much changing.
Sunday, October 04, 2009
RE:PAIR - Tip - Cleaning saws and sanders
Popped in to the local Tool Shop to get a new diamond cutter blade.
I was also asking the gurus there if it was OK to use my chop saw to cut plastic bottles (for my next Voucher Palm design) as I was worried about dulling the blade.
They said it was fine, and indeed mentioned that using plastic bottles actually can help clean both blades and even sanding discs.
I was also asking the gurus there if it was OK to use my chop saw to cut plastic bottles (for my next Voucher Palm design) as I was worried about dulling the blade.
They said it was fine, and indeed mentioned that using plastic bottles actually can help clean both blades and even sanding discs.
Buffer time!
As in... hitting 'em:(
That last post generated a new error.
Seems you can only have 2000 labels, and I have hit the limit.
How can I describe, and archive, an evolving world within this new restraint?
I guess a purge is in order... if I can figure out how.
That last post generated a new error.
Seems you can only have 2000 labels, and I have hit the limit.
How can I describe, and archive, an evolving world within this new restraint?
I guess a purge is in order... if I can figure out how.
The future's bright, the future's not looking too green
The latest Pentaward winners - Hat tip: Lovely Package
Friday, October 02, 2009
PR OPPORTUNITY - Another road trip, another possible chance to attract the media
Making and mending around Britain
Fresh from Ethical Man, it seems Newsnight is on the green trail again.
This one seems quite proactive and 'Doing-oriented', so worthy of waving at them in passing. Let's see if we can attract their attention before they hit London. Host Mary Jane Baxter is getting/generating a fair bit of coverage...
Here's our pitch:
Oh, it is not a passing trend. We have been advocating reuse as not only helping planet, but saving pocket, too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/herefordandworcester/content/articles/2006/05/16/womble_man_feature.shtml And when such as the Guardian ask Junkk.com to help run a national reuse competition with them, then it can only be a good sign:
http://www.junkk.com/newsarticle.asp?slevel=0z608z609&parent_id=609&renleewtsapf=301 Already netted some notions from the sublime:
http://www.junkk.com/junkkdetail.asp?slevel=0z622&parent_id=622&renleewtsapf=1917 To the frankly so simple, why didn't anyone think of it before?...
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2009/06/idea-cup-stack-holder.html So when you're swinging through the West Midlands (though the route on the map seems a bit East-centric), do pop by, a lot can and does happen here...
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2009/09/voucher-palm-lives-again.html And, if you're quick, we have an entire cosy cottage you can use as a base (aged parent off to care home and being marketed to let as we speak). Always welcome a hand, along with a boost, here.
Oh, and if it is mainly about fashion... Vac:Sac anyone?
http://www.junkk.com/junkkdetail.asp?slevel=0z622z709&parent_id=709&renleewtsapf=1730 Or a repair.. http://www.junkk.com/junkkdetail.asp?slevel=0z622&parent_id=622&renleewtsapf=1330 ps: You might even find out how to save some money on fuel as well. http://junkk.blogspot.com/2009/01/journeys-with-veronique-now-our-life-is.html
Fired off a hello. Let's see what results. Let us know if you apply/get coverage, too. If you do, please 'gis a mention if you found it here. I was soooo tempted not to mention and keep it to ourselves.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
AWARD - Sustainable businesses - Queen’s Awards for Enterprise
AWARD
WHEN: Deadline - 2pm on 30 October 2009
WHAT: Sustainable businesses - Queen’s Awards for Enterprise
WHAT... MORE?: From the blurb: The Queen’s Award for Enterprise is the UK’s most prestigious Awards scheme for business success. There are four categories of Queen’s Awards – three for business success (International Trade, Innovation and... Sustainable Development) and one for individual achievement in encouraging UK entrepreneurship (The Queen’s Award for Enterprise Promotion). Companies apply for the Business Awards but individuals must be nominated for the QAEP
HOW MUCH: Free! Just how we like it.
URL: Application forms can be completed online at www.queensawards.org.uk.
COMMENTS: It's a biggie and commands a lot of respect. Might even try ourselves:) Shame the trophy couldn't be commissioned from reused materials!
WHEN: Deadline - 2pm on 30 October 2009
WHAT: Sustainable businesses - Queen’s Awards for Enterprise
WHAT... MORE?: From the blurb: The Queen’s Award for Enterprise is the UK’s most prestigious Awards scheme for business success. There are four categories of Queen’s Awards – three for business success (International Trade, Innovation and... Sustainable Development) and one for individual achievement in encouraging UK entrepreneurship (The Queen’s Award for Enterprise Promotion). Companies apply for the Business Awards but individuals must be nominated for the QAEP
HOW MUCH: Free! Just how we like it.
URL: Application forms can be completed online at www.queensawards.org.uk.
COMMENTS: It's a biggie and commands a lot of respect. Might even try ourselves:) Shame the trophy couldn't be commissioned from reused materials!
Freecycle - A cautionary tale?
What went wrong with Freecycle in the UK?
I have to say I never really had a problem with it, but must confess that, being at the junction of three counties, gave up paying much attention (and hence using) having joined the three groups that this geographical location necessitated (JunkkYard being radial and without limit).
The emails and posts first got side-directed... and then ignored.
Plus I also never quite 'got' the model, which seem to rely on volunteers to run it, but then, as suggested here, seemed to have a board running... meddling with... the show, and seemingly trying it figure out how to make money on top.
Anyway, I'll top up the Category next, though cranking an eyebrow at 'you can't keep taking without giving' on the, new 'musty' non-autocratic front.
Here, we kinda err on 'so long as it is genuinely helping the planet, and all sides are cool on the deal... knock yourselves out'. But that's just us.
I have to say I never really had a problem with it, but must confess that, being at the junction of three counties, gave up paying much attention (and hence using) having joined the three groups that this geographical location necessitated (JunkkYard being radial and without limit).
The emails and posts first got side-directed... and then ignored.
Plus I also never quite 'got' the model, which seem to rely on volunteers to run it, but then, as suggested here, seemed to have a board running... meddling with... the show, and seemingly trying it figure out how to make money on top.
Anyway, I'll top up the Category next, though cranking an eyebrow at 'you can't keep taking without giving' on the, new 'musty' non-autocratic front.
Here, we kinda err on 'so long as it is genuinely helping the planet, and all sides are cool on the deal... knock yourselves out'. But that's just us.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Ta twit, ta woo
I am a twit... erer. @JunkkMale:)
Jury's out still, but I can't fault the access I now have via those I follow to useful info, links and, on occasion, 140 characters or less of worthy philosophy.
And I also share. Not as often as some, but more than others. I hope those that read value what I post.
Also bearing in mind that, thanks to the aggregation software kindly loaded in here, this post will pop up on Twitter within 24hrs.
Anyhoo, as one still finding my feet, I value useful ways to improve, and even the odd critique to spot things to avoid:
RandyGage.com - The Twitter Manifesto Remix…
Jury's out still, but I can't fault the access I now have via those I follow to useful info, links and, on occasion, 140 characters or less of worthy philosophy.
And I also share. Not as often as some, but more than others. I hope those that read value what I post.
Also bearing in mind that, thanks to the aggregation software kindly loaded in here, this post will pop up on Twitter within 24hrs.
Anyhoo, as one still finding my feet, I value useful ways to improve, and even the odd critique to spot things to avoid:
RandyGage.com - The Twitter Manifesto Remix…
CATEGORY - Hydro
ARTICLES
Register - ‘NZ hydropower drought could see leccy rationing’ - Sorry to start on a negative, as I rather like Hydro, but the comments in support are worth reading.
Treehugger - NEW - Clever Floating Hydro-Electric Barrel Generator Works Almost Anywhere
INFORMATION
See the label links below for more/previous
Herefordshire Hydro - NEW
Register - ‘NZ hydropower drought could see leccy rationing’ - Sorry to start on a negative, as I rather like Hydro, but the comments in support are worth reading.
Treehugger - NEW - Clever Floating Hydro-Electric Barrel Generator Works Almost Anywhere
INFORMATION
See the label links below for more/previous
Herefordshire Hydro - NEW
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
PR OPPORTUNITY - When it comes to throwing stuff away, there's no such thing as "away"
How a rubbish idea could save the planet
I was intrigued by this as much for the the story (using pretty much every phrase I have used about Junkk & reuse) as the responses to it.
Shame the Telegraph (non blog) system doesn't hyperlink URLs.
Fortunately, we do:
But we are also offering 10 British residents the chance to tag their own property for an experiment over here. Nominations close tomorrow, so visit newscientist.com/projects/forms/trash to submit your ideas for what I reckon is the best rubbish experiment ever.
I was intrigued by this as much for the the story (using pretty much every phrase I have used about Junkk & reuse) as the responses to it.
Shame the Telegraph (non blog) system doesn't hyperlink URLs.
Fortunately, we do:
But we are also offering 10 British residents the chance to tag their own property for an experiment over here. Nominations close tomorrow, so visit newscientist.com/projects/forms/trash to submit your ideas for what I reckon is the best rubbish experiment ever.
The Voucher Palm lives!... again:)
Just had a call from my chums at EnviroAbility.
Seems they have had customers coming in all week asking why there is not another voucher tree in the place as the Morrisons Let's Grow promo is back.
Their wish... is my not really needed excuse to get back in the shed to make some more coconuts (as all the schools in the last one got their vouchers in theirs).
Nice to see a bit of reuse... reused:)
And to think I wasn't going to 'push it' by suggesting we do it again. Especially as, following the massive redemption success of the last one, Morrisons have again forgotten to mention it to me to see if we can put one in their foyer, where it would do most good:)
Curse this shy, retiring personality.
Seems they have had customers coming in all week asking why there is not another voucher tree in the place as the Morrisons Let's Grow promo is back.
Their wish... is my not really needed excuse to get back in the shed to make some more coconuts (as all the schools in the last one got their vouchers in theirs).
Nice to see a bit of reuse... reused:)
And to think I wasn't going to 'push it' by suggesting we do it again. Especially as, following the massive redemption success of the last one, Morrisons have again forgotten to mention it to me to see if we can put one in their foyer, where it would do most good:)
Curse this shy, retiring personality.
Peaks and troughs
I was going to label that 'pros' and cons', but that would not be accurate.
Or, maybe, two sides to the coin?
Actually it's an amalgamation of all.
Earlier today I spotted this:
Telegraph - Half of Paris rental bikes stolen
But decided against sharing, as it was, well, a bit negative.
However, having now seen this:
FoE - New cash for cycling facilities at stations
I have decided on a post, as the information is precautionary and worth bearing in mind. And does suggest an enviROI aspect.
If also being a bit depressing about the human condition, mind.
Or, maybe, two sides to the coin?
Actually it's an amalgamation of all.
Earlier today I spotted this:
Telegraph - Half of Paris rental bikes stolen
But decided against sharing, as it was, well, a bit negative.
However, having now seen this:
FoE - New cash for cycling facilities at stations
I have decided on a post, as the information is precautionary and worth bearing in mind. And does suggest an enviROI aspect.
If also being a bit depressing about the human condition, mind.
CATEGORY - LABELLING
Wow, I can't believe I'd missed giving this its own 'label' (sorry) 'til now!
There is a lot more already; just click 'LABELLING' in the label (whoops, again:) list at the end.
Articles
Food&DrinkEurope.com - Deal could make traffic lights mandatory, claims report - For now, let's kick off with this, which isn't actually about pack labelling at all, but puts the state of the industry and legislation in context.
Guardian - Tesco labels will show products' carbon footprints - I await, with interest, by what agreed standard these footprints are derived/assessed, and what, if anything, the bemused shopper will make of them... and then do.
Guardian - Why the Co-op is wary of 'food miles' labelling - Is it not all rather boiling down a bit to 'my science is better than your science', and when the science objectivity doesn't suit then ethics trump all? Meanwhile, what the heck is the poor consumer supposed to DO...assuming they care enough to try and figure it all out? I sure am having trouble, as it's not my day job (well, not to the exclusion of all else) and I have waaaaay better things to do as I stroll down the aisles once a week. We seem to be getting a heck of a lot served up in short order to 'help' with shunting the attention away to us...:
Greenbang - Tesco’s food labels to carry carbon confessions
'These carbon labels will mean customers can measure the eco-friendliness of their shopping'
And...?
I can just see my missus flouncing out of Hereford Tesco to Gloucester Waitrose because the pack of Walker's stoat and hemlock flavour demanded by 'they-who-must be fed-junk-food' might have 5g less CO2 in it than the current 75g... whatever that actually means or translates into. Versus what? And from where (who WILL have a different set of measures, trust me)? And doing the same with the 50-100 other items that she needs to get from shelf to trolley in 30 minutes of a Friday night. She's freaked out enough that in sorting out the polyfiller-unmentionables in their tuck boxes she has actually sent their salt and vinegar levels to a point where the NHS can opt out once they hit 30.
At the mo, all I can sense is the cringing screech of a box being ticked, soon to be followed by a generous ladle of a mighty ad campaign to tell us that said box is now ticked.
Wouldn't it be great if the guv'mint, manufacturers and retailers got together on a few more well-coordinated, high enviROI initiatives that the public could surely be encouraged to work with, but without dumping the whole sorry mess on the poor consumer to figure out and deal with (which they won't) whilst slapping mutual backs at the next target-for-tonight enviro-conference.
Treehugger - Should Food Labelling Show Water Footprint? -
Super. Pretty soon we'll need a DVD-R on a pack of Tik-Taks to contain all the information we are deemed... or maybe required to know before purchase.
So far, in just the last few months, I am up to health (at least 3 versions here in the UK), carbon footprint, airmiles, Fairtrade, Organics (I think they are now fighting it out) and now water.
And you know what? Even with 75g of C02 on my pack of crisps I have no clue what it means, what to compare it to or what I can do (drive to another shop?)
It will make the weekly shopping a fun event.
But at least a whole new raft of green saviours can score funding on the back of it.
Will the last guy actually doing something to help spare the future please stop pedalling before they leave.
The Telegraph - Tesco to put carbon scores on goods - They shoots... ?
Food&DrinkEurope - Green logos create brand tension - Maybe we need a 'no-go' logo area?
BBC - Supermarket trials carbon labels - In many ways it's better than nothing, but I'm just having trouble seeing how it works. And I doubt a visit to the store will make much difference, though I will keep my eye open next time. This BBC piece suggests 'Shoppers will be able to compare products' carbon footprints' But with what? And then...? We are talking 20 pretty diverse items out of how many in those 20+ aisles you have 30 minutes to zip up and down? One interesting aspect is the totality of the experience, highlighted by the way in which you cook a spud making a big difference.
Enviromental Leader - Carbon Trust Rolls Out Carbon Label Program - Though I do crank an eyebrow at this: 'A number of other carbon label programs are in the works from various organizations.'
Brand Channel - Coffee Brands: Wake Up and Smell the Morality - I need a drink
BBC - Foods 'should label up eco-costs'
Indy - Call for new 'universal' food labelling - well, we are so good at cross-national cooperation, so it's going to be a cinch
Guardian - Government urged to introduce 'omni-standards' for food - Guess the PR is doing the rounds then
FoodandDrinkEurope - Could consumers suffer from green logo overload? - Nice they ask, though I'd say it's more 'Are consumers already suffering...' with a consequent total lack of enviROI+.
Indy - Crackdown ordered on food label loopholes - Again, only related, but still a worthy caution on how any scheme can be manipulated.
Food&DrinkEurope - Half of all consumers ignore food labels - only half?
Food&DrinkEurope - What consumers make of food labels - it's about health, but most will apply to 'green'.
Greenbang - New barcode to provide products’ carbon footprint - interesting, mind you as it is noted recently that 50% consumers ignore health labels, there may be some way to go yet. I also wonder what 'measure' it is operating to, as there are several I have heard of. Maybe they have standardised?
Guardian - Shoppers need clear labels to put a stop to 'greenwash' - of course, there's 'should', and 'calling for', and 'actually happening'.
Packaging News - Valpak issues Green Dot guidance for UK brand owners - '..concerns that consumers believed a pack that displayed the Green Dot was recyclable.' There is no equivalent symbol in the UK that denotes whether a company had complied with its packaging waste obligations, although the information is available via the Environment Agency public register.
Packaging News - Why green logos are all Greek - With certain irony, I just visited a council roadshow where they were explaining why we were losing our - very effective - weekly double RE:box kerbside system for a fortnightly all-in-one, 'the MRF will sort it all out' wheelie.
And, in addition to pencils and stickers, I also ha a choice of multiple leaflets saying roughly the same thing... with choices also printed in Portuguese and Polish.
However, what I did notice, in very small print, was that the onus is still being lobbed on the consumer to try and find,and suss out various small, often embossed only, signs of what is 'acceptable'. I was met by a wall of fudge when asking what would happen should my kids do the wrong thing, or a passer-by 'contribute' to my new outdoor rubbish-practices proxy representative.
I agree that information is necessary to inform and get the public to engage, but only when it is in forms that the layperson can comprehend and work with, and only when the systems are configured to handle the cooperation demanded in a proper manner.
This is not yet the case. A bunch of box-ticking wonks and target-meeting bureaucrats living in a jargon-filled world of niche conferences and metrics are not the best folk to understand and deliver ways to motivate consumers or spare the planet. And neither in complement are marketers more interested in getting the former off their backs than doing anything with a decent enviROI. IMHO.
Times - Green labels to show foods’ eco-credentials - one also for the 'could' files
Marketing Week - Green labelling could overwhelm shoppers with data - Ya think?
Good Human - Greenwash Of The Week: Climate-Friendly Food Labels - Not a fan, I'd say
Treehugger - NEW - Via Junkk - Can 400 Green Labels Do Anything But Confuse The World's Consumers?
Information
Budget Ecoist - Plastics Numbering System Demystified: Go Green
BusinessGreen - Report urges firms to "edit" out non-green choices - worth a read if your life is that long and you have no mates
co2code.info - NIFTY!!!
Planet Green - Get to Know Your Recyclable Plastics by Number
environmentalleader.com - Green Labels Positively Impact Purchase Behavior
wrap-symbols - it's PR, but useful
WRAP - Recycling symbols explained
Logos (currently in development - ignore for now)
As the visual imagery behind all this goes hand in had with a plethora of logos, I have decided to start noting 'em down as I stumble across them.
Now, the blogger limit in images per post will preclude all that will be going up eventually, so until I can figure a better way I will post one by one as a 'Logo' and then link from here to that, with picture, if you see what I mean
carbon neutral - saw it in my SKY magazine. No idea what it means. And it is not the only one of its type, either.
ecolingo.com - a goodly spread of logos and definitions
recycle now -
valpak green dot -
Packaging News - Why green logos are all Greek
Courtesy of a blog exchange, I can kick off a sub-set list with an odd first attempt:
PRINTING INKS (first point of business is that, so far, no one seems to really know if there is a standard)
recycledproducts.com - 'Switching to soy inks'
soybiobased.org -
wgiprint.com -
There is a lot more already; just click 'LABELLING' in the label (whoops, again:) list at the end.
Articles
Food&DrinkEurope.com - Deal could make traffic lights mandatory, claims report - For now, let's kick off with this, which isn't actually about pack labelling at all, but puts the state of the industry and legislation in context.
Guardian - Tesco labels will show products' carbon footprints - I await, with interest, by what agreed standard these footprints are derived/assessed, and what, if anything, the bemused shopper will make of them... and then do.
Guardian - Why the Co-op is wary of 'food miles' labelling - Is it not all rather boiling down a bit to 'my science is better than your science', and when the science objectivity doesn't suit then ethics trump all? Meanwhile, what the heck is the poor consumer supposed to DO...assuming they care enough to try and figure it all out? I sure am having trouble, as it's not my day job (well, not to the exclusion of all else) and I have waaaaay better things to do as I stroll down the aisles once a week. We seem to be getting a heck of a lot served up in short order to 'help' with shunting the attention away to us...:
Greenbang - Tesco’s food labels to carry carbon confessions
'These carbon labels will mean customers can measure the eco-friendliness of their shopping'
And...?
I can just see my missus flouncing out of Hereford Tesco to Gloucester Waitrose because the pack of Walker's stoat and hemlock flavour demanded by 'they-who-must be fed-junk-food' might have 5g less CO2 in it than the current 75g... whatever that actually means or translates into. Versus what? And from where (who WILL have a different set of measures, trust me)? And doing the same with the 50-100 other items that she needs to get from shelf to trolley in 30 minutes of a Friday night. She's freaked out enough that in sorting out the polyfiller-unmentionables in their tuck boxes she has actually sent their salt and vinegar levels to a point where the NHS can opt out once they hit 30.
At the mo, all I can sense is the cringing screech of a box being ticked, soon to be followed by a generous ladle of a mighty ad campaign to tell us that said box is now ticked.
Wouldn't it be great if the guv'mint, manufacturers and retailers got together on a few more well-coordinated, high enviROI initiatives that the public could surely be encouraged to work with, but without dumping the whole sorry mess on the poor consumer to figure out and deal with (which they won't) whilst slapping mutual backs at the next target-for-tonight enviro-conference.
Treehugger - Should Food Labelling Show Water Footprint? -
Super. Pretty soon we'll need a DVD-R on a pack of Tik-Taks to contain all the information we are deemed... or maybe required to know before purchase.
So far, in just the last few months, I am up to health (at least 3 versions here in the UK), carbon footprint, airmiles, Fairtrade, Organics (I think they are now fighting it out) and now water.
And you know what? Even with 75g of C02 on my pack of crisps I have no clue what it means, what to compare it to or what I can do (drive to another shop?)
It will make the weekly shopping a fun event.
But at least a whole new raft of green saviours can score funding on the back of it.
Will the last guy actually doing something to help spare the future please stop pedalling before they leave.
The Telegraph - Tesco to put carbon scores on goods - They shoots... ?
Food&DrinkEurope - Green logos create brand tension - Maybe we need a 'no-go' logo area?
BBC - Supermarket trials carbon labels - In many ways it's better than nothing, but I'm just having trouble seeing how it works. And I doubt a visit to the store will make much difference, though I will keep my eye open next time. This BBC piece suggests 'Shoppers will be able to compare products' carbon footprints' But with what? And then...? We are talking 20 pretty diverse items out of how many in those 20+ aisles you have 30 minutes to zip up and down? One interesting aspect is the totality of the experience, highlighted by the way in which you cook a spud making a big difference.
Enviromental Leader - Carbon Trust Rolls Out Carbon Label Program - Though I do crank an eyebrow at this: 'A number of other carbon label programs are in the works from various organizations.'
Brand Channel - Coffee Brands: Wake Up and Smell the Morality - I need a drink
BBC - Foods 'should label up eco-costs'
Indy - Call for new 'universal' food labelling - well, we are so good at cross-national cooperation, so it's going to be a cinch
Guardian - Government urged to introduce 'omni-standards' for food - Guess the PR is doing the rounds then
FoodandDrinkEurope - Could consumers suffer from green logo overload? - Nice they ask, though I'd say it's more 'Are consumers already suffering...' with a consequent total lack of enviROI+.
Indy - Crackdown ordered on food label loopholes - Again, only related, but still a worthy caution on how any scheme can be manipulated.
Food&DrinkEurope - Half of all consumers ignore food labels - only half?
Food&DrinkEurope - What consumers make of food labels - it's about health, but most will apply to 'green'.
Greenbang - New barcode to provide products’ carbon footprint - interesting, mind you as it is noted recently that 50% consumers ignore health labels, there may be some way to go yet. I also wonder what 'measure' it is operating to, as there are several I have heard of. Maybe they have standardised?
Guardian - Shoppers need clear labels to put a stop to 'greenwash' - of course, there's 'should', and 'calling for', and 'actually happening'.
Packaging News - Valpak issues Green Dot guidance for UK brand owners - '..concerns that consumers believed a pack that displayed the Green Dot was recyclable.' There is no equivalent symbol in the UK that denotes whether a company had complied with its packaging waste obligations, although the information is available via the Environment Agency public register.
Packaging News - Why green logos are all Greek - With certain irony, I just visited a council roadshow where they were explaining why we were losing our - very effective - weekly double RE:box kerbside system for a fortnightly all-in-one, 'the MRF will sort it all out' wheelie.
And, in addition to pencils and stickers, I also ha a choice of multiple leaflets saying roughly the same thing... with choices also printed in Portuguese and Polish.
However, what I did notice, in very small print, was that the onus is still being lobbed on the consumer to try and find,and suss out various small, often embossed only, signs of what is 'acceptable'. I was met by a wall of fudge when asking what would happen should my kids do the wrong thing, or a passer-by 'contribute' to my new outdoor rubbish-practices proxy representative.
I agree that information is necessary to inform and get the public to engage, but only when it is in forms that the layperson can comprehend and work with, and only when the systems are configured to handle the cooperation demanded in a proper manner.
This is not yet the case. A bunch of box-ticking wonks and target-meeting bureaucrats living in a jargon-filled world of niche conferences and metrics are not the best folk to understand and deliver ways to motivate consumers or spare the planet. And neither in complement are marketers more interested in getting the former off their backs than doing anything with a decent enviROI. IMHO.
Times - Green labels to show foods’ eco-credentials - one also for the 'could' files
Marketing Week - Green labelling could overwhelm shoppers with data - Ya think?
Good Human - Greenwash Of The Week: Climate-Friendly Food Labels - Not a fan, I'd say
Treehugger - NEW - Via Junkk - Can 400 Green Labels Do Anything But Confuse The World's Consumers?
Information
Budget Ecoist - Plastics Numbering System Demystified: Go Green
BusinessGreen - Report urges firms to "edit" out non-green choices - worth a read if your life is that long and you have no mates
co2code.info - NIFTY!!!
Planet Green - Get to Know Your Recyclable Plastics by Number
environmentalleader.com - Green Labels Positively Impact Purchase Behavior
wrap-symbols - it's PR, but useful
WRAP - Recycling symbols explained
Logos (currently in development - ignore for now)
As the visual imagery behind all this goes hand in had with a plethora of logos, I have decided to start noting 'em down as I stumble across them.
Now, the blogger limit in images per post will preclude all that will be going up eventually, so until I can figure a better way I will post one by one as a 'Logo' and then link from here to that, with picture, if you see what I mean
carbon neutral - saw it in my SKY magazine. No idea what it means. And it is not the only one of its type, either.
ecolingo.com - a goodly spread of logos and definitions
recycle now -
valpak green dot -
Packaging News - Why green logos are all Greek
Courtesy of a blog exchange, I can kick off a sub-set list with an odd first attempt:
PRINTING INKS (first point of business is that, so far, no one seems to really know if there is a standard)
recycledproducts.com - 'Switching to soy inks'
soybiobased.org -
wgiprint.com -
Tricky question, I know
Can 400 Green Labels Do Anything But Confuse The World's Consumers?
Anyone would think these things were there to help informed choice, lead to better enviROI behaviours, etc.
And were nothing to do with box-ticking, target-meeting, jobsworth-creating, greenwashing, ace-tasting, motivating, lip-smacking...
Anyone would think these things were there to help informed choice, lead to better enviROI behaviours, etc.
And were nothing to do with box-ticking, target-meeting, jobsworth-creating, greenwashing, ace-tasting, motivating, lip-smacking...
Monday, September 28, 2009
CATEGORY - CAR SHARING
Inspired by a BBC Breakfast news item that was less than considered... or helpful, I have decided to note anything that actually helps those who are keen and might benefit from such a process.
I think it's a great idea in principle, but actually have doubts on many in terms of enviROI on top of simple matters of practicality. Most issues would be addressed by engaging public cooperation, but that is true of so much in the green arena.
I question an empty lane with few cars moving, creating a reduced number of others burning up fuel while stationary.
The secret seems to be to get people to share effectively. Not plonk idealistic initiatives in place and fine those who do not.
BBC - Car-sharing cameras to be tested
Addendum - It's odd, but I often find so-called 'petrolheads', invited to comment one presumes because they will offer a contrary view to any eco-initiatives, are often pretty well-informed and capable of quite objective feedback. One such is Quentin Willson, who I just saw on this issue, and frankly he was more balanced than the frothy govt.-babe or the AA-harrumpher.
And though it is not yet active, I have in mind a scheme of my own using Junkk.com's localisation capability, so I'll list other sites that might yet be of use, to be added to as found in my files, stumbled across... or told of. Yet another 'rainy day' project.
DFT - Ruth Kelly opens first motorway car share lane
BBC - Newer - Motorway car-sharing lane opens - But we beat 'em..hah! They have more links, mind:(
Guardian- Tread lightly: Share car journeys And again
Guardian - Vehicles of change
Guardian - Would you stick out your cyber thumb for a lift?
INFORMATION
Direct Gov - NEW - Car sharing and car clubs
DoT - Essential Guide to Travel Planning
SITES
Avego -
carclubs.org.uk -
carplus - NEW -
carshare - kind of makes any others I list redundant! However...
fellowtravellers.co.uk -
hitchwiki.org -
liftshare.org -
onegreenearth.com - another summary. Which makes this a suummary of summaries, I guess
pickuppal.com - Canada
rideshark.com -
School-run -
Streetcar -
Student carshare -
I think it's a great idea in principle, but actually have doubts on many in terms of enviROI on top of simple matters of practicality. Most issues would be addressed by engaging public cooperation, but that is true of so much in the green arena.
I question an empty lane with few cars moving, creating a reduced number of others burning up fuel while stationary.
The secret seems to be to get people to share effectively. Not plonk idealistic initiatives in place and fine those who do not.
BBC - Car-sharing cameras to be tested
Addendum - It's odd, but I often find so-called 'petrolheads', invited to comment one presumes because they will offer a contrary view to any eco-initiatives, are often pretty well-informed and capable of quite objective feedback. One such is Quentin Willson, who I just saw on this issue, and frankly he was more balanced than the frothy govt.-babe or the AA-harrumpher.
And though it is not yet active, I have in mind a scheme of my own using Junkk.com's localisation capability, so I'll list other sites that might yet be of use, to be added to as found in my files, stumbled across... or told of. Yet another 'rainy day' project.
DFT - Ruth Kelly opens first motorway car share lane
BBC - Newer - Motorway car-sharing lane opens - But we beat 'em..hah! They have more links, mind:(
Guardian- Tread lightly: Share car journeys And again
Guardian - Vehicles of change
Guardian - Would you stick out your cyber thumb for a lift?
INFORMATION
Direct Gov - NEW - Car sharing and car clubs
DoT - Essential Guide to Travel Planning
SITES
Avego -
carclubs.org.uk -
carplus - NEW -
carshare - kind of makes any others I list redundant! However...
fellowtravellers.co.uk -
hitchwiki.org -
liftshare.org -
onegreenearth.com - another summary. Which makes this a suummary of summaries, I guess
pickuppal.com - Canada
rideshark.com -
School-run -
Streetcar -
Student carshare -
Saturday, September 26, 2009
IRONY ALERT - The Jumbo-choppercade
You know I tend to worry about then right messengers for the message..?
ecopolitology - Jon Stewart Points out Irony of Jumbo-Choppercades at UN Climate Summit
Also, and allowing for the rather directional nature of the edit suite, I was rather struck by the fact that these guys were all talking.... er... talking... and talking.
And it's possible that one reason not as many folk are listening is... because they still seem to be saying nothing!
ecopolitology - Jon Stewart Points out Irony of Jumbo-Choppercades at UN Climate Summit
Also, and allowing for the rather directional nature of the edit suite, I was rather struck by the fact that these guys were all talking.... er... talking... and talking.
And it's possible that one reason not as many folk are listening is... because they still seem to be saying nothing!
Friday, September 25, 2009
PR COVERAGE - Making it... and mending
A wee while ago I was contacted by a very nice lady who had heard about Junkk.com.
Better yet, she liked what we were up to.
This... is the more than pleasant result:
From ad agency to inventor
It is a nice, readable useful blog to stay abreast of green trends, plus they have a book, too.
Great to make new friends, and further partners in mending the future.
Monday, September 21, 2009
COMPETITION - AltUse Packaging Promo
COMPETITION
WHEN: Now to 10 Feb, it looks... Correction: 2 Oct! that US/UK thing.
WHAT: A RE:use blog is offering munny for the best, and most ideas.
WHAT... MORE?: Not really. As the sign-up is passworded, can't access. It's on the Home Page.
HOW MUCH: Free, I hope.
URL: http://www.altuse.com/index.php?index=1
COMMENTS: Now, how many can I enter? And... will non-US be accepted? Hey-ho. but at least all you lovely US sign-ups are now vindicated:)
WHEN: Now to 10 Feb, it looks... Correction: 2 Oct! that US/UK thing.
WHAT: A RE:use blog is offering munny for the best, and most ideas.
WHAT... MORE?: Not really. As the sign-up is passworded, can't access. It's on the Home Page.
HOW MUCH: Free, I hope.
URL: http://www.altuse.com/index.php?index=1
COMMENTS: Now, how many can I enter? And... will non-US be accepted? Hey-ho. but at least all you lovely US sign-ups are now vindicated:)
Entering the Lion's Den
As I think this may be important, I have entered a PMWNCC debate..
Sober exit from the ozone party
Just when I was getting worried about climate change we now learn that the climate may even fail.
So they are no more qualified to comment on climate than Kevin from Rotherham.
Careful, there may be a pre-eminent Professor of climate stuff out there, first name Kevin, who is from Rotherham. Then by the law of association and 'wot u sed', that means others will then become 'qualified'.
Honestly, I am unsure what 'qualifications' one needs to be 'qualified' to comment on climate change, especially with the anthro kicker that is sometimes added.
I wish there was, because a lot of servers worldwide might get less heated (along with what they shuffle through), if things were/could be a bit more definitive. But, sadly, as we are dealing with the future, short of hiring Dr. Who to the Met Office, things seem unlikely to be ever much improved on the guarantee front, prediction wise. And so much, like flying a B2, seems to be in the realms of super-computers that can defy the more linear logic of the human brain, even a trained science or engineering one. Which can prove an issue of trust, relying on what some (possibly) fallible folk have put in a whizzy box to chew on, and it, GIGOesquely, pops out for those same folk to 'interpret'. Often, it seems, depending on what they want to see.
Which brings me to your other point, which I have indeed seen raised elsewhere.
At risk of being labelled an 'ist' of some tribal extreme, when I merely admit to not knowing for sure yet, but am still keen to find out more, may I pose what I hope (perhaps in vain) a question that more informed... perhaps better 'qualified' minds can explain. Links can help, but just saying 'this chap reckons it's so and she's got a few letters after her name so it must be' is not often the best deal sealer, these days, at least for me.
Anyway....
Key to many 'measures' being discussed, is that 'man' is still doing his darndest to heat the place up and up, and that is the only issue. Hence it seems a bit odd to concede (is it? Or is that just some, and their findings are being pounced upon out of context?... though as Mr. Mandelson has shown of late, that spin is a dodgy one to try for painting black as white)* that all these efforts are being outweighed by another, cooling effect, albeit deemed a 'pause'.
As our race is not, yet, mitigating our efforts in any meaningful way, what then is powerful enough to go from complementing to now reversing our damaging efforts, and how can some be so precise in identifying when that effect will flip again?
For the absence of doubt, I am just asking. Shrieking denier without explanation might not help me understand, though I do concede that this direction might not help the anthro-pessimistic advocacy argument. Unless there is a good reason, which I am more than happy to have explained.
There are some fine minds out there, if from different... um, directions... so I hope what I think is a fair, if possibly naive question (if so, please say so, but just saying 'it's too complicated for you to understand' is Jana Bennett territory) might be contributed to in an informative and persuasive manner.
It will be interesting to see how what I hope is a measured contribution gets handled but what I fear, from experience, two tribes only interested in going to war over words.
In which case I will go back to just not wasting, seeking better efficiencies, and checking the enviROI before leaping to any 'green has to be good' conclusions.
*Addendum - BBC Today - Global temperatures 'could cool'
Just love the journalistic, ratings-hungry conceit of lobbing a 'could', extreme headline up front (or simply say 'is' out loud), with a more cautious 'so says' qualifier in the tail. Helpful?
By way of a possible answer to my question, there was a mention/discussion (if between two folk of possibly less science-based heft than the leading climate modeler quoted) to 'cyclical changes in the Atlantic', which was more tantalising than overwhelming.
What was less than inspiring was the other 70% of the exchange, which seemed more concerned about how it 'might look' from such as Jon 'I just interpret events' Humphrys, ending with a word from his oppo that I usually crank an eyebrow at: narrative. As in 'enhancing' it?
Yes, truths can be inconvenient, but as another noted BBC global warming (are we headed back to this? I gather man-made is off the menu, but from hearing these two chaps chat even climate change is optional) reporter found a while ago, being too willing to allow them to emerge without much journalistic rigour can erode trust in ability and objectivity.
Addendum - I have been... am enjoying the discussion, but wonder where it is going (especially as I see the whole 'tis/'t'isn't big picture and hence personal stuff creeping in, which means it may be time for me to retire gracefully and leave it to those who see profit in such exchanges).
Yes, I pen.. key... 'lots', but I fear I do not have the time to write shorter pieces.
Especially as, ironically, in many ways, it looks as if things are coming full circle. As we now seem at a point where it has swung to matters of degree of the MM in MMGW (I have always favoured the less snappy, though in the circumstances possibly more helpful term: 'Probably man-worsened negative climate change').
Because now we need to glance at other, tricky waters, namely who said (claimed) what, and when. And especially with what deadlines. It may well be that we are in a phase of geo-climatic trending, where graphs can indeed peak and trough over decades. However, the contribution of man is what is being talked about (with a lot riding on it), and data cited in support of this, and that seems hard to marry with many claims made to date, and requiring faith to ignore when they prove exaggerated. Especially when we have an awful lot being pinned on some goalposts that are already moving, yet some who see themselves at the vanguard still cannot resist deadlines that may again disappoint, in matters of months (albeit 100, or 8 years). This, in light of the topic of discussion, seems foolhardy.
And this again leads me to wonder about the abilities and competencies of the messengers who think they are doing a bang up job in bringing the message in a comprehensive and persuasive form to the people. And I am not sure having hissy fits, stamping feet and muttering darkly about 'impositions' as some 'know better' is quite going to cut it, at least in free press democracies, and may well end in tears.
Not looking great, as it is fairly clear these 'chosen ones' are not about to step down, much less shut up (or at least get sensible). Too much ego, and money at stake. Ironically, something that has been and is lobbed around at those (foolishly in my view) addicted to the finite, last legs resource that is oil. And speaking of goalposts, it seems to me that the more extreme advocates from that end of the 'climate change' debate are being handed open ones too often by those who in theory are seeking to promote convincing solutions to real problems, but are spending a tad too much on ensuring their way is followed no matter what.
So no, I am not convinced, yet, that global warming is man made. Totally. Or even to the level that seems to get you labelled a 'denier', albeit illogically and without foundation, for not being fully with 'the team'. Or that, in the absence of dealing with bigger ticket items (such as deforestation or population), beyond sensible preventions of waste and improvements in efficiency, we might not be better advised to direct our efforts more to coping as opposed to totally trying to avoid, as all eggs in that basket is currently a leap of faith I find hard to justify on the 'evidence' so far.
I have called it 'Survival of the Selfish', and it seems to be being practiced a fair bit already. Even closer to home, especially by those in the steering house of our analogous ship, who seem to feel their use of the helicopter to whizz about (I am sure it is hard to resist an invitation to stand on an ice floe if you are a pol or a reporter, but when you are on TV, how it looks goes beyond the screen) is OK, unaware that those in the decks below can't quite see the distinction between the impositions of and on their jobs and lifestyles, and those of the ones usually funding them but told to stay put and deal with less.
I may well be wrong. But as an old client once, crushingly, advised me during a presentation: 'No, I have not failed to understand. The problem is that you have so far failed to persuade me'.
Thank heavens for our relationship, and the future of that account, we were both big enough to understand and hence work further on all that was inherent in that 'so far'.
Addendum - This is an interesting, ongoing series, so i won't put my added comments in to waste space. Best part is, with a few minor exceptions, it is being conducted in a civilised manner. So far. I do however have my suspicions that some contributing might not be as free of agenda, or indeed informed experience, as they might claim or their nicknames suggest.
FT - Emissions fall in 2008: and not entirely because of the recession
Guardian - Will the UN climate change summit lead to a deal? - A good comment early on about population and deforestation needing to be in and/or higher. Plus the value of certain polls.
Sober exit from the ozone party
Just when I was getting worried about climate change we now learn that the climate may even fail.
So they are no more qualified to comment on climate than Kevin from Rotherham.
Careful, there may be a pre-eminent Professor of climate stuff out there, first name Kevin, who is from Rotherham. Then by the law of association and 'wot u sed', that means others will then become 'qualified'.
Honestly, I am unsure what 'qualifications' one needs to be 'qualified' to comment on climate change, especially with the anthro kicker that is sometimes added.
I wish there was, because a lot of servers worldwide might get less heated (along with what they shuffle through), if things were/could be a bit more definitive. But, sadly, as we are dealing with the future, short of hiring Dr. Who to the Met Office, things seem unlikely to be ever much improved on the guarantee front, prediction wise. And so much, like flying a B2, seems to be in the realms of super-computers that can defy the more linear logic of the human brain, even a trained science or engineering one. Which can prove an issue of trust, relying on what some (possibly) fallible folk have put in a whizzy box to chew on, and it, GIGOesquely, pops out for those same folk to 'interpret'. Often, it seems, depending on what they want to see.
Which brings me to your other point, which I have indeed seen raised elsewhere.
At risk of being labelled an 'ist' of some tribal extreme, when I merely admit to not knowing for sure yet, but am still keen to find out more, may I pose what I hope (perhaps in vain) a question that more informed... perhaps better 'qualified' minds can explain. Links can help, but just saying 'this chap reckons it's so and she's got a few letters after her name so it must be' is not often the best deal sealer, these days, at least for me.
Anyway....
Key to many 'measures' being discussed, is that 'man' is still doing his darndest to heat the place up and up, and that is the only issue. Hence it seems a bit odd to concede (is it? Or is that just some, and their findings are being pounced upon out of context?... though as Mr. Mandelson has shown of late, that spin is a dodgy one to try for painting black as white)* that all these efforts are being outweighed by another, cooling effect, albeit deemed a 'pause'.
As our race is not, yet, mitigating our efforts in any meaningful way, what then is powerful enough to go from complementing to now reversing our damaging efforts, and how can some be so precise in identifying when that effect will flip again?
For the absence of doubt, I am just asking. Shrieking denier without explanation might not help me understand, though I do concede that this direction might not help the anthro-pessimistic advocacy argument. Unless there is a good reason, which I am more than happy to have explained.
There are some fine minds out there, if from different... um, directions... so I hope what I think is a fair, if possibly naive question (if so, please say so, but just saying 'it's too complicated for you to understand' is Jana Bennett territory) might be contributed to in an informative and persuasive manner.
It will be interesting to see how what I hope is a measured contribution gets handled but what I fear, from experience, two tribes only interested in going to war over words.
In which case I will go back to just not wasting, seeking better efficiencies, and checking the enviROI before leaping to any 'green has to be good' conclusions.
*Addendum - BBC Today - Global temperatures 'could cool'
Just love the journalistic, ratings-hungry conceit of lobbing a 'could', extreme headline up front (or simply say 'is' out loud), with a more cautious 'so says' qualifier in the tail. Helpful?
By way of a possible answer to my question, there was a mention/discussion (if between two folk of possibly less science-based heft than the leading climate modeler quoted) to 'cyclical changes in the Atlantic', which was more tantalising than overwhelming.
What was less than inspiring was the other 70% of the exchange, which seemed more concerned about how it 'might look' from such as Jon 'I just interpret events' Humphrys, ending with a word from his oppo that I usually crank an eyebrow at: narrative. As in 'enhancing' it?
Yes, truths can be inconvenient, but as another noted BBC global warming (are we headed back to this? I gather man-made is off the menu, but from hearing these two chaps chat even climate change is optional) reporter found a while ago, being too willing to allow them to emerge without much journalistic rigour can erode trust in ability and objectivity.
Addendum - I have been... am enjoying the discussion, but wonder where it is going (especially as I see the whole 'tis/'t'isn't big picture and hence personal stuff creeping in, which means it may be time for me to retire gracefully and leave it to those who see profit in such exchanges).
Yes, I pen.. key... 'lots', but I fear I do not have the time to write shorter pieces.
Especially as, ironically, in many ways, it looks as if things are coming full circle. As we now seem at a point where it has swung to matters of degree of the MM in MMGW (I have always favoured the less snappy, though in the circumstances possibly more helpful term: 'Probably man-worsened negative climate change').
Because now we need to glance at other, tricky waters, namely who said (claimed) what, and when. And especially with what deadlines. It may well be that we are in a phase of geo-climatic trending, where graphs can indeed peak and trough over decades. However, the contribution of man is what is being talked about (with a lot riding on it), and data cited in support of this, and that seems hard to marry with many claims made to date, and requiring faith to ignore when they prove exaggerated. Especially when we have an awful lot being pinned on some goalposts that are already moving, yet some who see themselves at the vanguard still cannot resist deadlines that may again disappoint, in matters of months (albeit 100, or 8 years). This, in light of the topic of discussion, seems foolhardy.
And this again leads me to wonder about the abilities and competencies of the messengers who think they are doing a bang up job in bringing the message in a comprehensive and persuasive form to the people. And I am not sure having hissy fits, stamping feet and muttering darkly about 'impositions' as some 'know better' is quite going to cut it, at least in free press democracies, and may well end in tears.
Not looking great, as it is fairly clear these 'chosen ones' are not about to step down, much less shut up (or at least get sensible). Too much ego, and money at stake. Ironically, something that has been and is lobbed around at those (foolishly in my view) addicted to the finite, last legs resource that is oil. And speaking of goalposts, it seems to me that the more extreme advocates from that end of the 'climate change' debate are being handed open ones too often by those who in theory are seeking to promote convincing solutions to real problems, but are spending a tad too much on ensuring their way is followed no matter what.
So no, I am not convinced, yet, that global warming is man made. Totally. Or even to the level that seems to get you labelled a 'denier', albeit illogically and without foundation, for not being fully with 'the team'. Or that, in the absence of dealing with bigger ticket items (such as deforestation or population), beyond sensible preventions of waste and improvements in efficiency, we might not be better advised to direct our efforts more to coping as opposed to totally trying to avoid, as all eggs in that basket is currently a leap of faith I find hard to justify on the 'evidence' so far.
I have called it 'Survival of the Selfish', and it seems to be being practiced a fair bit already. Even closer to home, especially by those in the steering house of our analogous ship, who seem to feel their use of the helicopter to whizz about (I am sure it is hard to resist an invitation to stand on an ice floe if you are a pol or a reporter, but when you are on TV, how it looks goes beyond the screen) is OK, unaware that those in the decks below can't quite see the distinction between the impositions of and on their jobs and lifestyles, and those of the ones usually funding them but told to stay put and deal with less.
I may well be wrong. But as an old client once, crushingly, advised me during a presentation: 'No, I have not failed to understand. The problem is that you have so far failed to persuade me'.
Thank heavens for our relationship, and the future of that account, we were both big enough to understand and hence work further on all that was inherent in that 'so far'.
Addendum - This is an interesting, ongoing series, so i won't put my added comments in to waste space. Best part is, with a few minor exceptions, it is being conducted in a civilised manner. So far. I do however have my suspicions that some contributing might not be as free of agenda, or indeed informed experience, as they might claim or their nicknames suggest.
FT - Emissions fall in 2008: and not entirely because of the recession
Guardian - Will the UN climate change summit lead to a deal? - A good comment early on about population and deforestation needing to be in and/or higher. Plus the value of certain polls.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
PROF'S POSER - Stone cold
Here's one for the thermodynamicists.
And/or anyone in one of the UK's many older homes, where certain insulation options are not exactly on the table. 3' thick stone walls and no gaps, for one.
After a not bad summer, with doors opened to the outside to air the place out, or opened to the conservatory to warm up the interior for most evenings, now we have hit September it's starting to get a wee bitty nippy.
Certainly for my Eastern blossom missus. And while her going around like a hood ornament for Dr. Zhivago is a fashion treat, the neighbours are talking.
My poser is (and a memory lurks that I might have done so before)... when is the right point at which to fire up the central heating?
Because one thing we have noticed, if empirically, is that if you leave it late and allow the cold to bite, the walls seem to keep it that way no matter what.
However, for good eco and plain money reasons, I don't want to be running the boiler until I have to.
And/or anyone in one of the UK's many older homes, where certain insulation options are not exactly on the table. 3' thick stone walls and no gaps, for one.
After a not bad summer, with doors opened to the outside to air the place out, or opened to the conservatory to warm up the interior for most evenings, now we have hit September it's starting to get a wee bitty nippy.
Certainly for my Eastern blossom missus. And while her going around like a hood ornament for Dr. Zhivago is a fashion treat, the neighbours are talking.
My poser is (and a memory lurks that I might have done so before)... when is the right point at which to fire up the central heating?
Because one thing we have noticed, if empirically, is that if you leave it late and allow the cold to bite, the walls seem to keep it that way no matter what.
However, for good eco and plain money reasons, I don't want to be running the boiler until I have to.
COMPETITION - Offoo Laureate
COMPETITION
WHEN: Deadline 31 December 2009
WHAT: Ooffoo Laureate Annual Writing Competition 2010
WHAT... MORE?: from the blurb: 'looking for an inspiring letter that you would write to a world leader or somebody of global or significant influence. The award will go to the person who is judged to have written the most impressive and inspiring letter - one that offers hope or encouragement and is aimed at helping to change things for the better. '
HOW MUCH: My favourite... FREE! For writing a letter!
URL: http://www.ooffoo.com/listing/Ooffoo-Laureate-Annual-Writing-Competition-2010.aspx
COMMENTS: Tempted to enter myself, as an opinionated sod, but... as a pro writer, what if I end up last? Er... £1000 prize swings it.
WHEN: Deadline 31 December 2009
WHAT: Ooffoo Laureate Annual Writing Competition 2010
WHAT... MORE?: from the blurb: 'looking for an inspiring letter that you would write to a world leader or somebody of global or significant influence. The award will go to the person who is judged to have written the most impressive and inspiring letter - one that offers hope or encouragement and is aimed at helping to change things for the better. '
HOW MUCH: My favourite... FREE! For writing a letter!
URL: http://www.ooffoo.com/listing/Ooffoo-Laureate-Annual-Writing-Competition-2010.aspx
COMMENTS: Tempted to enter myself, as an opinionated sod, but... as a pro writer, what if I end up last? Er... £1000 prize swings it.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Can niche topic journalists think laterally?
I just ask, because...
Water or the web? - What does Africa need more - easy access to fresh water or better cheaper internet connections?
I have to ask, as the author doesn't half make a meal out of a pretty obvious answer.
Water or the web? - What does Africa need more - easy access to fresh water or better cheaper internet connections?
I have to ask, as the author doesn't half make a meal out of a pretty obvious answer.
Imagining is good. Doing even more satisfying.
I grabbed an opportunity for a plug:
Re-Imagining the Scotch Tape Dispenser Without Changing it at All
You never know; it may get through to the right person.. eventually.
It's a pity, as I was all raring to cme up with some ideas for a current second use and a designed-in one.
Maybe I still will.
Re-Imagining the Scotch Tape Dispenser Without Changing it at All
You never know; it may get through to the right person.. eventually.
It's a pity, as I was all raring to cme up with some ideas for a current second use and a designed-in one.
Maybe I still will.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
IDEA - Store bought, but free store
Getting later and later, but this is a good tried and trusted one.
I love civilised debate
And, sometimes, you can be a small part of something rare.
Leaders in step on climate
Yes, it's on the BBC. Even more unique, it's about climate change (though I did note a 'quirk'*). And yet, I took part. To date, it has been worth it.
3. At 7:52pm on 14 Sep 2009:
I am usually hugely underwhelmed by the published results of any poll, from any quarter, especially when a media who depend and thrive on attention and ratings sink their teeth into them.
However, based purely on how reported here, a few things occur...
The British public has become more sceptical about climate change over the last five years, according to a survey.
Twice as many people now agree that "claims that human activities are changing the climate are exaggerated".
Not, exactly, a glowing endorsement of the abilities or trust held in most high-profile politico-media messengers, irrespective of the validity of their message. And, speaking as the parent of teens, not the best basis to go on to effect further change (correction?) in behaviour, be it perceived as 'wrong' or just 'apathy'. But I am guessing, from 'But it does show, I think, that the publics' and their leaders' perceptions of climate change, in the UK and elsewhere, are not significantly out of step." that a change of tack is unlikely any time soon, so carry on. It's worked/working gangbusters so far.
'What we have to get across is that residual uncertainty in science is normal'. And such as this Mondeo Man-engaging phrase is just what's needed to do it.
But, 'A third said there was too much conflicting evidence to know what is actually happening,' which suggests to me that there is still hope, as there are some as smart as they are honest.
Which is why both these sentences are a bit of a worry: "We need to make it clear to people what is due to climate change and what is not. "It is time we made it real to people." This would be 'clarity' according to whom? Made real by whom, and how? Bearing in mind 'Twice as many people now agree that "claims that human activities are changing the climate are exaggerated'. Rather requires a sea change in thinking on the persuasion front from now on, which seems unlikely if the same folk are still dishing it out. And the same public are seeing the next effort coming from those they didn't buy it from before. Trust is tricky to regain.
On current form, I rather worry that 'there is still some way to go before the public's perception matches that of their elected leaders' comes across as less of an observation and more of a challenge to overcome, and not necessarily in a good way, bearing in mind the public's faith in the competence or honesty of those at the helm to date. Especially when a few other 'for your own good' efforts of late have gone down like the proverbial lead balloon, undoing decades of hard fought, sincere and positive efforts.
36. At 09:34am on 15 Sep 2009:
Some great input here. Especially on matters of communication and perception (which I believe can be changed and worth discussing) beyond the 'science' (which seems to have been bogged down between two dogmatic extremes, often charmingly encapsulated by the words 'deniers' and 'warmists', and pretty much dead in the water as regards rational debate). Just a pity one depends on the other to a significant degree (or two).
25. At 01:47am on 15 Sep 2009, Sceptic_Kev wrote:
If you cry wolf and work hard to kill the wolf, then people still assume your a liar.
I am struggling to recall Y2K, but one thing I do is that on that night I was not in a bunker with my tin foil hat on, so somewhere along the line I either ceased to be bothered or chilled out. And a possibly significant aspect is that I do not recall much, or at least the same level of 'official' headless chicken running then. This seemed mainly a media construct and, as pointed out, perhaps inspired or at least accelerated the public's faith failing with 24/7, over-staffed, under-qualified, excessively narrative enhanced, any-pundit-in-a-storm events interpretation.
Suddenly it wasn't just a few banking systems that were going to fail, it was the end of the world.
And when the likes of me realised that reporters seemed to be flying hither and thither to report on 'the end of the world' from nicer venues untroubled that their planes' clocks might be a bit fast, we tended to err more on the side of those who cautioned it was just a few banking systems. QED.
Not a scientific parallel at all here, in fact dangerously so (potentially), but in terms of our faith in media-driven warning systems based on science....
26. At 02:03am on 15 Sep 2009, mhfisher
Another great, telling post. The media love pigeon holes. And adversarial stances. So you are either old, smart and cynical or young, inexperienced and idealistic. Er... how about 'none of the above?', which I rather suspect the average of the silent majority are.
And it also is pretty critical how the questions are put. From surveys to the way they get reported, the *anthropomorphic qualifier pops in and out like a Labour senior minister (it will be the same for Conservative ones if they gain power) from the bunker depending on whether they need to explain a howler or be photographed beside David Beckham.
It may be shorthand, and may be implicit to some, and even be properly applied in the professional research, but that word does not appear, for instance, in the first para of this blog post. I know the climate is changing, and it seems not in a good way. I also think ever more humans are not helping anything much by releasing ever more consequences of their daily business. Just... not so sure yet about the the link, and scale of influence being claimed, and used as excuses for pretty scary stuff by some. Especially those who see cutting back as what others do and some need not (oddly, one set being those they think they 'rule', and another those who treat them with distain but might still fund the odd pension if sucked up to correctly).
I feel like the media coverage needs to change but continue. In what capacity I am not sure. It’s unfortunate that the media has the power to take something serious and turn people off from it.
Bingo, if for different reasons and possibly from different ends of the quaint demographic divide (if by age at least) suggested.
But one last thing to bear in mind. Just because I am proving a harder sell does not mean I don't care, or want to understand. Don't know how many of our passionate youth are parents, but when you are middle aged with kids, with almost none of the suggested consequences in one's lifetime to worry about, the suggestions of some that the likes of me don't have the best interests of my children at heart is at best scientifically silly, and at worst foolishly insulting. That is, if reaching consensus for sensible, practical, action on the part of the total population is really what those more vocal in their 'concerns' really want.
Keetsa - TRUSTING THE GREEN BLOGS TODAY
Leaders in step on climate
Yes, it's on the BBC. Even more unique, it's about climate change (though I did note a 'quirk'*). And yet, I took part. To date, it has been worth it.
3. At 7:52pm on 14 Sep 2009:
I am usually hugely underwhelmed by the published results of any poll, from any quarter, especially when a media who depend and thrive on attention and ratings sink their teeth into them.
However, based purely on how reported here, a few things occur...
The British public has become more sceptical about climate change over the last five years, according to a survey.
Twice as many people now agree that "claims that human activities are changing the climate are exaggerated".
Not, exactly, a glowing endorsement of the abilities or trust held in most high-profile politico-media messengers, irrespective of the validity of their message. And, speaking as the parent of teens, not the best basis to go on to effect further change (correction?) in behaviour, be it perceived as 'wrong' or just 'apathy'. But I am guessing, from 'But it does show, I think, that the publics' and their leaders' perceptions of climate change, in the UK and elsewhere, are not significantly out of step." that a change of tack is unlikely any time soon, so carry on. It's worked/working gangbusters so far.
'What we have to get across is that residual uncertainty in science is normal'. And such as this Mondeo Man-engaging phrase is just what's needed to do it.
But, 'A third said there was too much conflicting evidence to know what is actually happening,' which suggests to me that there is still hope, as there are some as smart as they are honest.
Which is why both these sentences are a bit of a worry: "We need to make it clear to people what is due to climate change and what is not. "It is time we made it real to people." This would be 'clarity' according to whom? Made real by whom, and how? Bearing in mind 'Twice as many people now agree that "claims that human activities are changing the climate are exaggerated'. Rather requires a sea change in thinking on the persuasion front from now on, which seems unlikely if the same folk are still dishing it out. And the same public are seeing the next effort coming from those they didn't buy it from before. Trust is tricky to regain.
On current form, I rather worry that 'there is still some way to go before the public's perception matches that of their elected leaders' comes across as less of an observation and more of a challenge to overcome, and not necessarily in a good way, bearing in mind the public's faith in the competence or honesty of those at the helm to date. Especially when a few other 'for your own good' efforts of late have gone down like the proverbial lead balloon, undoing decades of hard fought, sincere and positive efforts.
36. At 09:34am on 15 Sep 2009:
Some great input here. Especially on matters of communication and perception (which I believe can be changed and worth discussing) beyond the 'science' (which seems to have been bogged down between two dogmatic extremes, often charmingly encapsulated by the words 'deniers' and 'warmists', and pretty much dead in the water as regards rational debate). Just a pity one depends on the other to a significant degree (or two).
25. At 01:47am on 15 Sep 2009, Sceptic_Kev wrote:
If you cry wolf and work hard to kill the wolf, then people still assume your a liar.
I am struggling to recall Y2K, but one thing I do is that on that night I was not in a bunker with my tin foil hat on, so somewhere along the line I either ceased to be bothered or chilled out. And a possibly significant aspect is that I do not recall much, or at least the same level of 'official' headless chicken running then. This seemed mainly a media construct and, as pointed out, perhaps inspired or at least accelerated the public's faith failing with 24/7, over-staffed, under-qualified, excessively narrative enhanced, any-pundit-in-a-storm events interpretation.
Suddenly it wasn't just a few banking systems that were going to fail, it was the end of the world.
And when the likes of me realised that reporters seemed to be flying hither and thither to report on 'the end of the world' from nicer venues untroubled that their planes' clocks might be a bit fast, we tended to err more on the side of those who cautioned it was just a few banking systems. QED.
Not a scientific parallel at all here, in fact dangerously so (potentially), but in terms of our faith in media-driven warning systems based on science....
26. At 02:03am on 15 Sep 2009, mhfisher
Another great, telling post. The media love pigeon holes. And adversarial stances. So you are either old, smart and cynical or young, inexperienced and idealistic. Er... how about 'none of the above?', which I rather suspect the average of the silent majority are.
And it also is pretty critical how the questions are put. From surveys to the way they get reported, the *anthropomorphic qualifier pops in and out like a Labour senior minister (it will be the same for Conservative ones if they gain power) from the bunker depending on whether they need to explain a howler or be photographed beside David Beckham.
It may be shorthand, and may be implicit to some, and even be properly applied in the professional research, but that word does not appear, for instance, in the first para of this blog post. I know the climate is changing, and it seems not in a good way. I also think ever more humans are not helping anything much by releasing ever more consequences of their daily business. Just... not so sure yet about the the link, and scale of influence being claimed, and used as excuses for pretty scary stuff by some. Especially those who see cutting back as what others do and some need not (oddly, one set being those they think they 'rule', and another those who treat them with distain but might still fund the odd pension if sucked up to correctly).
I feel like the media coverage needs to change but continue. In what capacity I am not sure. It’s unfortunate that the media has the power to take something serious and turn people off from it.
Bingo, if for different reasons and possibly from different ends of the quaint demographic divide (if by age at least) suggested.
But one last thing to bear in mind. Just because I am proving a harder sell does not mean I don't care, or want to understand. Don't know how many of our passionate youth are parents, but when you are middle aged with kids, with almost none of the suggested consequences in one's lifetime to worry about, the suggestions of some that the likes of me don't have the best interests of my children at heart is at best scientifically silly, and at worst foolishly insulting. That is, if reaching consensus for sensible, practical, action on the part of the total population is really what those more vocal in their 'concerns' really want.
Keetsa - TRUSTING THE GREEN BLOGS TODAY
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)