Gives new meaning to shop 'til we drop. New shopping centres could be a waste of space
"Thanks to a new generation of "internet" shoppers who are more than happy to try out [stuff] in the store before ordering it to be delivered to their homes."
But bad news for landlords. Altogether now... 'Ahhhhh'.
Good or bad? No more traveling for us, unless you need to visit to look, in which case that makes trips for you and the delivery. Hmnn.
Friday, November 17, 2006
Damn site cooler than a Prius, eh?
I like hydrogen. So why does the way this - hydrogen car: beauty or beast? - seem to be heading in the wrong direction?
PROs?
BMW has already received plenty of offers from politicians and executives, scientists and athletes, rock stars and TV personalities, all eager to help "create visibility for hydrogen".
Madonna, David Suzuki, Al Gore and Arnold Schwarzenegger are said to be among a long line of celebrities queuing up to endorse the car, and perhaps further enhance their own green images in the process.
CONS!
The problem is that currently most hydrogen is generated from fossil fuels, since the cost of generating it from, say, solar energy can be up to four times higher.
And when hydrogen is produced this way, well-to-tank and tank-to-wheel analysis shows the overall carbon dioxide emissions from hydrogen powered cars can be higher than that from petrol or diesel powered vehicles.
Thank you Nick. This could so many places, but certainly here. Thre's also one more kink I didn't know:
"It seems that image is everything. I hear that various green-tinted celebs are being sized up by BMW to run the new hydrogen powered 7 Series, the "zero emission" car. There's just one small problem: the absence of any hydrogen filling stations means that they're going to have to be refuelled on site with the H2 delivered in an ordinary, diesel-burning truck. At risk of sounding like the Daily Mail's Richard Littlejohn (and keeping up the tangential Robin Hood connection), you couldn't make it up."
PROs?
BMW has already received plenty of offers from politicians and executives, scientists and athletes, rock stars and TV personalities, all eager to help "create visibility for hydrogen".
Madonna, David Suzuki, Al Gore and Arnold Schwarzenegger are said to be among a long line of celebrities queuing up to endorse the car, and perhaps further enhance their own green images in the process.
CONS!
The problem is that currently most hydrogen is generated from fossil fuels, since the cost of generating it from, say, solar energy can be up to four times higher.
And when hydrogen is produced this way, well-to-tank and tank-to-wheel analysis shows the overall carbon dioxide emissions from hydrogen powered cars can be higher than that from petrol or diesel powered vehicles.
Thank you Nick. This could so many places, but certainly here. Thre's also one more kink I didn't know:
"It seems that image is everything. I hear that various green-tinted celebs are being sized up by BMW to run the new hydrogen powered 7 Series, the "zero emission" car. There's just one small problem: the absence of any hydrogen filling stations means that they're going to have to be refuelled on site with the H2 delivered in an ordinary, diesel-burning truck. At risk of sounding like the Daily Mail's Richard Littlejohn (and keeping up the tangential Robin Hood connection), you couldn't make it up."
If you can't stand being in the kitchen, fine the cook
Turn Up The Heat - Guardian
I was a tad worried when I saw "Now it may be starting produce action as well. The Queen's speech included plans to legislate against rising carbon emissions," and precious little by way of legislating FOR anything.
Sure, enough sticks to make that Roman symbol of authority (now what was it called again?) will be needed in a lot of areas, but there are surely some others where the great and good of our Dear Leaderships can try for a few carrots, too.
Not from the waffle I've heard from Ministers on breakfast TV lately.
People need mates as well as nannies!
I was a tad worried when I saw "Now it may be starting produce action as well. The Queen's speech included plans to legislate against rising carbon emissions," and precious little by way of legislating FOR anything.
Sure, enough sticks to make that Roman symbol of authority (now what was it called again?) will be needed in a lot of areas, but there are surely some others where the great and good of our Dear Leaderships can try for a few carrots, too.
Not from the waffle I've heard from Ministers on breakfast TV lately.
People need mates as well as nannies!
See you in hell, Dell
I don't know why I say this, surrounded as I am by Dell PCs and printers, and with them doing a lot more than some to mitigate their e-footprint, but what goes around comes around: Dell delays filing results as inquiry is stepped up
Of course the fire alert was not their fault, and really I have no real complaints about the machines, other than our massive hard drive failure that cost us so dear.
And this enquiry, which seems so damaging, is nothing to do with my big beef: their customer service. The arrogance was breathtaking.
I could have been fighting their corner. Now I'm waiting to laugh as the redundancies bite, but only at senior level. The poor sods at ground zero always seemed OK and are the ones who will really suffer.
Of course the fire alert was not their fault, and really I have no real complaints about the machines, other than our massive hard drive failure that cost us so dear.
And this enquiry, which seems so damaging, is nothing to do with my big beef: their customer service. The arrogance was breathtaking.
I could have been fighting their corner. Now I'm waiting to laugh as the redundancies bite, but only at senior level. The poor sods at ground zero always seemed OK and are the ones who will really suffer.
Trust me, I'm in blogging
You gotta love the public:
"This... is astounding.
I use blogs (perhaps too much for my RSI and sanity) both ways, and love what they can do to round out what’s out there.
But... trust them more than ’newspapers, TV advertisements or email marketing campaigns’???!!
These are tightly constrained, monitored and controlled media, subject to censure and fines.
Blogs are the wildest, woolliest West.
It’s a sorry commentary on our faith in media these days.
But maybe blogs are not having it all their own way (via me and some others), even BBC’s Newsnight:
“Where there is any form of shortlist*, agendas come into play, making both the process and the result immediately open to... 'concerns'. Even with no editing, what stays in and what is kept out shapes the story.’
*Substitute selection, moderation or any other similar word you fancy here."
Just added this to Newsnight:
You gotta love the public:
"This - "Public trust blogs over marketing" is astounding:
http://www.precisionmarketing.co.uk//Articles/252203/Public+trust+blogs+over+marketing.html
But maybe blogs are not having it all their own way; just look on these pages.
Some of mine appear. Some do not. And it's not because I use naughty words. If not, why?
At least they always end up on my, totally trustworthy, blog:)
The Guardian is on it, too: Should the BBC pay for user-generated content?
Plus another, related topic I added to.
"This... is astounding.
I use blogs (perhaps too much for my RSI and sanity) both ways, and love what they can do to round out what’s out there.
But... trust them more than ’newspapers, TV advertisements or email marketing campaigns’???!!
These are tightly constrained, monitored and controlled media, subject to censure and fines.
Blogs are the wildest, woolliest West.
It’s a sorry commentary on our faith in media these days.
But maybe blogs are not having it all their own way (via me and some others), even BBC’s Newsnight:
“Where there is any form of shortlist*, agendas come into play, making both the process and the result immediately open to... 'concerns'. Even with no editing, what stays in and what is kept out shapes the story.’
*Substitute selection, moderation or any other similar word you fancy here."
Just added this to Newsnight:
You gotta love the public:
"This - "Public trust blogs over marketing" is astounding:
http://www.precisionmarketing.co.uk//Articles/252203/Public+trust+blogs+over+marketing.html
But maybe blogs are not having it all their own way; just look on these pages.
Some of mine appear. Some do not. And it's not because I use naughty words. If not, why?
At least they always end up on my, totally trustworthy, blog:)
The Guardian is on it, too: Should the BBC pay for user-generated content?
Plus another, related topic I added to.
A Right Royal..?
No, that's it. I just pose the question.
Inspired by Get on your bikes, the green Prince of Wales tells his staff , I sense a double dose of 'Damned if you do'... plus 'Nothing green can be black and white'
Gawd knows why, the guy is a role model. What he says, and does is news. And he says and does a lot, and has a bevvy of equerries to let us know about it. And where he goes, some folk may follow.
My first thought was 'here we go again'. I guess bus and tube doesn't cut it. At least he bought the bikes. I just hope they have places to park each end. And non-energy consuming ways to dry off when it rains. I notice they are 'available'. This could be fun. A bit like who leaves last at night (and switches the lights off... yay!).
What is interesting is this - "Royal accounts show that it costs taxpayers £13 per mile to transport a royal by air, compared to £41 per mile by royal train." - which is the dilemma I raised in the Newsnight blog the other day. How do we as taxpayers feel about footing his eco-desires... and example, when it is quite a lot of dosh for very little actual result.
And lo, it came to pass: Noblesse Oblige, in the Gaurdian
Inspired by Get on your bikes, the green Prince of Wales tells his staff , I sense a double dose of 'Damned if you do'... plus 'Nothing green can be black and white'
Gawd knows why, the guy is a role model. What he says, and does is news. And he says and does a lot, and has a bevvy of equerries to let us know about it. And where he goes, some folk may follow.
My first thought was 'here we go again'. I guess bus and tube doesn't cut it. At least he bought the bikes. I just hope they have places to park each end. And non-energy consuming ways to dry off when it rains. I notice they are 'available'. This could be fun. A bit like who leaves last at night (and switches the lights off... yay!).
What is interesting is this - "Royal accounts show that it costs taxpayers £13 per mile to transport a royal by air, compared to £41 per mile by royal train." - which is the dilemma I raised in the Newsnight blog the other day. How do we as taxpayers feel about footing his eco-desires... and example, when it is quite a lot of dosh for very little actual result.
And lo, it came to pass: Noblesse Oblige, in the Gaurdian
Thursday, November 16, 2006
I'm Proud Of This
In reply to a recent editorial invitation, regarding Social Enterprise, which was actually part of a whole raft of stuff that day but (one said write in).
"In one of your accompanying pieces, the question is asked: What can the Government do to encourage social enterprise?
I'd say a heck of a lot, and it is. But then I’d go on to say.. mostly of the wrong things.
Why is where I'll offer my highly personal, and subjective, view.
I'm no longer young but I'm still enterprising, so I reckon at least 50% of what I have to share may apply. Social Enterprise is currently big, and across every demographic and sphere.
And as Martin Webb writes, "It's about using the imagination to create something that wasn't there before”, adding: "Enterprise Week isn't just about making money either".
However I'll have to take issue with "once you've got a mortgage, family and career to worry about it's difficult to think or act on purely altruistic lines. Secondly, all the lovely social content has got our politicians racing to be involved and will have no doubt made funding a whole lot easier". I haven't. And it hasn't.
As to "Gordon Brown is even hosting an event". Oh, Go.. od.
So I stand ready to be convinced that the Tories will do any better. But they can try to (convince me, that is). It's certainly interesting that George Osborne has said that there are "worrying signs" that Britain is becoming "less entrepreneurial, less competitive" yet the Chancellor claims that Britain is "beginning an enterprise renaissance".
Who to believe? That we face deep-rooted cultural barriers to entrepreneurship resonates, especially that 'we' (who is that?) are less ready to take on risks and are less entrepreneurial, less business orientated.
I'm pretty sure government is active when trying to encourage enterprise, but as stated, "Creating the right environment is much more important than simply starting new schemes and initiatives to tick boxes."
However, I do not agree the popularity of TV programmes like Dragons' Den and The Apprentice has helped to improve attitudes to entrepreneurship, at least in the intended way. If anyone thinks I'd go anywhere near the former, except for the dubious benefits of bad publicity, they can offer me half a decent sales rep’s salary for half my company. As to the latter, not that I watched it, it seems more like celebrity hype than anything else. The winner has done what? Meanwhile she who was second has a website that says... “Don’t waste our time and we won’t waste yours!” and is a female Cowell on Sky's Big Idea: Another show (which I was in, for all the right reasons: £100k of them) which is shaping up with an odd notion of what constitutes a UK world-beater.
I'd like to think my social enterprise has a social purpose. But so far the government has done very little to encourage me. It’s not for the want of trying. Third sector conferences. Quango grant application rounds. All funded, at least in the getting there, applying, etc, by me. Only to find myself surrounded by a lot of paid folk who know how such things work and can talk the talk. Not for profits. Charities. Folk who know folk who do this for a living and will do your pitch, for a fee (offset) in a way the box tickers love.
And if 90% of the money gets used up on offices, staff, regional offices, regional staff, pension, communications (best way to establish an empire) and expenses, plus fact-finding tours, before anything gets near a social enterprise doing anything, then that's how it's always been, isn’t it, Sir. Humphrey?
Details, I have. Just ask.
I just don't see how it's all making the world a much better place.
Maybe it's me. I'm creative. I have ideas. I applied this to advertising, and it worked well.
But when I see the word ‘innovation’ or ‘entrepreneur’ in any advertised funding initiative I groan. These guys don't want what they haven't seen before (pretty much my definition of innovative'). Or in a form they're not used to (my definition of creative). So is it any wonder we are not seeing cutting edge stuff being pushed through for all these gazillions? It's all SOSO (Same Old. Same Old). Or hype. The media are complicit. They don't want good, or what works. They want what will get ratings from the primetime viewers. Hours of presentation and debate chopped to a few minutes.. you’re in/out! I hate/like it!
If, as I believe, we have a bunch of grey suits (actually the last I dealt with had a T-shirt.. but it was grey, to match his mind) sitting on this vast resource, and simply being Uranus to true creative, if not businesslike (note: I don't mean business minded) innovators from Mars, for heaven's sake let's figure how to bridge that divide and get us back on track of being Great Britain again!"
"In one of your accompanying pieces, the question is asked: What can the Government do to encourage social enterprise?
I'd say a heck of a lot, and it is. But then I’d go on to say.. mostly of the wrong things.
Why is where I'll offer my highly personal, and subjective, view.
I'm no longer young but I'm still enterprising, so I reckon at least 50% of what I have to share may apply. Social Enterprise is currently big, and across every demographic and sphere.
And as Martin Webb writes, "It's about using the imagination to create something that wasn't there before”, adding: "Enterprise Week isn't just about making money either".
However I'll have to take issue with "once you've got a mortgage, family and career to worry about it's difficult to think or act on purely altruistic lines. Secondly, all the lovely social content has got our politicians racing to be involved and will have no doubt made funding a whole lot easier". I haven't. And it hasn't.
As to "Gordon Brown is even hosting an event". Oh, Go.. od.
So I stand ready to be convinced that the Tories will do any better. But they can try to (convince me, that is). It's certainly interesting that George Osborne has said that there are "worrying signs" that Britain is becoming "less entrepreneurial, less competitive" yet the Chancellor claims that Britain is "beginning an enterprise renaissance".
Who to believe? That we face deep-rooted cultural barriers to entrepreneurship resonates, especially that 'we' (who is that?) are less ready to take on risks and are less entrepreneurial, less business orientated.
I'm pretty sure government is active when trying to encourage enterprise, but as stated, "Creating the right environment is much more important than simply starting new schemes and initiatives to tick boxes."
However, I do not agree the popularity of TV programmes like Dragons' Den and The Apprentice has helped to improve attitudes to entrepreneurship, at least in the intended way. If anyone thinks I'd go anywhere near the former, except for the dubious benefits of bad publicity, they can offer me half a decent sales rep’s salary for half my company. As to the latter, not that I watched it, it seems more like celebrity hype than anything else. The winner has done what? Meanwhile she who was second has a website that says... “Don’t waste our time and we won’t waste yours!” and is a female Cowell on Sky's Big Idea: Another show (which I was in, for all the right reasons: £100k of them) which is shaping up with an odd notion of what constitutes a UK world-beater.
I'd like to think my social enterprise has a social purpose. But so far the government has done very little to encourage me. It’s not for the want of trying. Third sector conferences. Quango grant application rounds. All funded, at least in the getting there, applying, etc, by me. Only to find myself surrounded by a lot of paid folk who know how such things work and can talk the talk. Not for profits. Charities. Folk who know folk who do this for a living and will do your pitch, for a fee (offset) in a way the box tickers love.
And if 90% of the money gets used up on offices, staff, regional offices, regional staff, pension, communications (best way to establish an empire) and expenses, plus fact-finding tours, before anything gets near a social enterprise doing anything, then that's how it's always been, isn’t it, Sir. Humphrey?
Details, I have. Just ask.
I just don't see how it's all making the world a much better place.
Maybe it's me. I'm creative. I have ideas. I applied this to advertising, and it worked well.
But when I see the word ‘innovation’ or ‘entrepreneur’ in any advertised funding initiative I groan. These guys don't want what they haven't seen before (pretty much my definition of innovative'). Or in a form they're not used to (my definition of creative). So is it any wonder we are not seeing cutting edge stuff being pushed through for all these gazillions? It's all SOSO (Same Old. Same Old). Or hype. The media are complicit. They don't want good, or what works. They want what will get ratings from the primetime viewers. Hours of presentation and debate chopped to a few minutes.. you’re in/out! I hate/like it!
If, as I believe, we have a bunch of grey suits (actually the last I dealt with had a T-shirt.. but it was grey, to match his mind) sitting on this vast resource, and simply being Uranus to true creative, if not businesslike (note: I don't mean business minded) innovators from Mars, for heaven's sake let's figure how to bridge that divide and get us back on track of being Great Britain again!"
All grist to the windmill, eh?
From a Newsnight a whil ago: It's No Breeze
"That’ll teach me to go offline for a while! I was wondering if anyone had seen this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=415993&in_page_id=1770, and lo, it seems it is the DM who have only just picked up. My bad.
This... is a tad telling: “please, don't do it! I work in the renewables industry, and there is no doubt whatsoever that roof-mounted turbines are an expensive "con".
To set against this, now that B&Q is selling them hand over fist for Xmas, and as the downsides (if they are real) seem to have been sanitised a bit, at least mainstream, I do hope we will get accurate ROI (eco-nomic and –logical) figures... from you?
This is what I’m doing with my reviews, with a 6 month update on my first (funds a bit tight for the full monty of every device and every brand) - http://www.junkk.com/index.asp?parent_id=1135&slevel=0z1135 - coming soon."
You know, we really are poorly served with good info/data. It's all extremes. Yes it's the saviour... No it's a monster. Back to my oft posted arguments fro real ROI tables.
"That’ll teach me to go offline for a while! I was wondering if anyone had seen this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=415993&in_page_id=1770, and lo, it seems it is the DM who have only just picked up. My bad.
This... is a tad telling: “please, don't do it! I work in the renewables industry, and there is no doubt whatsoever that roof-mounted turbines are an expensive "con".
To set against this, now that B&Q is selling them hand over fist for Xmas, and as the downsides (if they are real) seem to have been sanitised a bit, at least mainstream, I do hope we will get accurate ROI (eco-nomic and –logical) figures... from you?
This is what I’m doing with my reviews, with a 6 month update on my first (funds a bit tight for the full monty of every device and every brand) - http://www.junkk.com/index.asp?parent_id=1135&slevel=0z1135 - coming soon."
You know, we really are poorly served with good info/data. It's all extremes. Yes it's the saviour... No it's a monster. Back to my oft posted arguments fro real ROI tables.
Well, you never know...
It all rather depends on whether they recall 70's TV shows. If not, I'm b******d (to keep in the BBC 'cred' vernacular.
"Dear J... ustin, I'd like to meet Mr. Gore too, one day. Soon(ish). I think he could help me help him help everyone mend the planet. Can you fix that for me? Thank you very much. Peter (Aged 49)"
"Dear J... ustin, I'd like to meet Mr. Gore too, one day. Soon(ish). I think he could help me help him help everyone mend the planet. Can you fix that for me? Thank you very much. Peter (Aged 49)"
Three strikes and you’re... still in?!
I added one to this:
"Well, you never know. As I’ve already written twice this is perhaps pushing it, but as this is where the debate started...
Out of 36 (at last count) posts, approx 30% (at.. etc, but a few were ‘replies’) were about moderated blogs.
As I may (or may not:) have been quoted, but certainly said, with mouth freshly washed out with soap, – publish-and-be-ignored on another of this site’s Forums - go_on_make_tv_history: “Where there is any form of shortlist*, agendas come into play, making both the process and the result immediately open to... 'concerns'. Even with no editing, what stays in and what is kept out shapes the story.
*Substitute selection, moderation or any other similar word you fancy here.
I must say that being ‘moderated’ by an outside company adds a new kink to impartial, objective public service broadcasting. Yes, it says so in the guidelines what will happen.
But.. er.. do we get told whose doing it? Rupert Murdoch? Kim Jong Il? Or, horror of horrors, a Govt. spin doctor?!!!"
"Well, you never know. As I’ve already written twice this is perhaps pushing it, but as this is where the debate started...
Out of 36 (at last count) posts, approx 30% (at.. etc, but a few were ‘replies’) were about moderated blogs.
As I may (or may not:) have been quoted, but certainly said, with mouth freshly washed out with soap, – publish-and-be-ignored on another of this site’s Forums - go_on_make_tv_history: “Where there is any form of shortlist*, agendas come into play, making both the process and the result immediately open to... 'concerns'. Even with no editing, what stays in and what is kept out shapes the story.
*Substitute selection, moderation or any other similar word you fancy here.
I must say that being ‘moderated’ by an outside company adds a new kink to impartial, objective public service broadcasting. Yes, it says so in the guidelines what will happen.
But.. er.. do we get told whose doing it? Rupert Murdoch? Kim Jong Il? Or, horror of horrors, a Govt. spin doctor?!!!"
One Man's Whinge..
Stop whinging
"It can be valuable to come to something fresh, and late, and sift through the debris with a mind unfogged by the emotions of the moment.
As is rightly pointed out from the off, there is what we want to do, what we should do, what we can do, what we have to do, what we’re made to do... and what we end up doing. These can often be at odds with each other.
There was a point being made in this piece. I have to say making it in Jamaica was a bit of a plus for the production team. Did the fam go too? No blue screen here; only blue skies. Haven’t watched it yet, so I can’t comment whether license fee money was saved by freebies in 1st, Club or cattle being offered in return for a stray logo cropping up in shot, and the local tourist board helping scratch mutual backs whilst there.
I am glad to see the offset issue has been addressed. I reckon we already need to plant a forest the size of Jupiter just to cope with Mrs. Beckett’s commute when she was in charge of our environmental future. Now where are her successors at the 'mo?
Taking the pledge is interesting. I could live with silver, if we could afford the fares. The in-laws are in Singapore, so it would be nice to see them. Can we make it a human right?
But I’m guessing this doesn’t count ‘business’, and options such as not splaying out in the same space in front or upstairs as do 4 others in cattle.
So we sometimes don’t have alternatives, but it is incumbent upon us to do our best to mitigate their impact. Did this? No.
ps: Phone charger: check. Noticed that it was warm even when not charging a mobile. Still got a couple of cordless jobs with little red lights on 24/7 though:( I don’t think they do DECT crank dial jobs.
pps: 17. Tobias, packing doesn’t have to go in the bin: http://www.junkk.com/ideas.asp?slevel=0z622&parent_id=622
As it is pertinent, let me post here what I think (that guy who does brainy stuff at college can tell us if it is or isn’t) is an ethical situation:
Thanks to my devastating insights on this issue, you invite me to appear on the show. Good for my cause; good for your... well... it kills a few primetime minutes cheaply. I think I read elsewhere on these blogs that you do pay costs, but on what basis I don’t know.
If it's London I’d say OK, at the time of night I could come in unethically by car, which will cost you for the travel, and my time, which is about 3hrs each way. Or, ‘cos I’m ethical, it’s the train, which is about the same travel time but a lot more expensive, plus the hotel ‘cos the last train’s gone, plus my additional opportunity costs of being away from home/office.
I posed this recently to a client who challenged my environmental credentials as I arrived by car, but decided after all that she’d live with my driving time of 10 minutes over paying my public transport time of 2hrs. Funny that.
Which do you choose?"
"It can be valuable to come to something fresh, and late, and sift through the debris with a mind unfogged by the emotions of the moment.
As is rightly pointed out from the off, there is what we want to do, what we should do, what we can do, what we have to do, what we’re made to do... and what we end up doing. These can often be at odds with each other.
There was a point being made in this piece. I have to say making it in Jamaica was a bit of a plus for the production team. Did the fam go too? No blue screen here; only blue skies. Haven’t watched it yet, so I can’t comment whether license fee money was saved by freebies in 1st, Club or cattle being offered in return for a stray logo cropping up in shot, and the local tourist board helping scratch mutual backs whilst there.
I am glad to see the offset issue has been addressed. I reckon we already need to plant a forest the size of Jupiter just to cope with Mrs. Beckett’s commute when she was in charge of our environmental future. Now where are her successors at the 'mo?
Taking the pledge is interesting. I could live with silver, if we could afford the fares. The in-laws are in Singapore, so it would be nice to see them. Can we make it a human right?
But I’m guessing this doesn’t count ‘business’, and options such as not splaying out in the same space in front or upstairs as do 4 others in cattle.
So we sometimes don’t have alternatives, but it is incumbent upon us to do our best to mitigate their impact. Did this? No.
ps: Phone charger: check. Noticed that it was warm even when not charging a mobile. Still got a couple of cordless jobs with little red lights on 24/7 though:( I don’t think they do DECT crank dial jobs.
pps: 17. Tobias, packing doesn’t have to go in the bin: http://www.junkk.com/ideas.asp?slevel=0z622&parent_id=622
As it is pertinent, let me post here what I think (that guy who does brainy stuff at college can tell us if it is or isn’t) is an ethical situation:
Thanks to my devastating insights on this issue, you invite me to appear on the show. Good for my cause; good for your... well... it kills a few primetime minutes cheaply. I think I read elsewhere on these blogs that you do pay costs, but on what basis I don’t know.
If it's London I’d say OK, at the time of night I could come in unethically by car, which will cost you for the travel, and my time, which is about 3hrs each way. Or, ‘cos I’m ethical, it’s the train, which is about the same travel time but a lot more expensive, plus the hotel ‘cos the last train’s gone, plus my additional opportunity costs of being away from home/office.
I posed this recently to a client who challenged my environmental credentials as I arrived by car, but decided after all that she’d live with my driving time of 10 minutes over paying my public transport time of 2hrs. Funny that.
Which do you choose?"
Publish And Be... Ignored?
A rich seam as I return to the Newsnight blog. Usually I graze only at the Ethical Man section. But this about democratic citizen journalism (UGC), caught my eye, and prompted a thought: Go on, make TV history
"I have to share some of the same concerns that first poster Themos Tsikas has. Where there is any form of shortlist, agendas come into play, making both the process and the result immediately open to... 'concerns'. Even with no editing, what stays in and what is kept out shapes the story. Look at the fun on the Ethical Man blog about posts that are, are not, are, so there... 'Missing in Moderation'... It's a hoot."
Your comment has been received and held for approval by the blog owner. There may be a delay before publication - click here for more information.
Having seen stuff of mine chosen and not chosen, or if chosen changed to suit the editorial agenda, the notion of a free press is rather quaint. I just admire those who have a stance, admit it, and when they publish they publish it all. Or nothing.
At least they can't get rid of this... yet.
"I have to share some of the same concerns that first poster Themos Tsikas has. Where there is any form of shortlist, agendas come into play, making both the process and the result immediately open to... 'concerns'. Even with no editing, what stays in and what is kept out shapes the story. Look at the fun on the Ethical Man blog about posts that are, are not, are, so there... 'Missing in Moderation'... It's a hoot."
Your comment has been received and held for approval by the blog owner. There may be a delay before publication - click here for more information.
Having seen stuff of mine chosen and not chosen, or if chosen changed to suit the editorial agenda, the notion of a free press is rather quaint. I just admire those who have a stance, admit it, and when they publish they publish it all. Or nothing.
At least they can't get rid of this... yet.
In with a chance?
I'm getting moderated out a lot these days, so let's see if this one to Newsnight - The ethics of radiator valves - makes it through.
'The plumbing, ethical, financial and environmental bits are pretty much covered. Despite the £300, I’d say go for it.
I needed to upgrade my system a while ago, so bolted on the rad valves to the boiler upgrade, as a lot of the costs were in the flushing of the system anyway, and the guys were there. Saves a trip cost. More of a dilemma when it’s just for the valves.
Maybe combine with the annual service? Get in quick before winter comes (if it does). And make sure they put things on the right way! 25% of ours are on backwards and hammer if they are not full on or off.
Now I’m going on to a real concern about another section raised in the piece, thanks to what looks like one of our Dear (as in ‘fine if you don’t; you pay not to get fined so do) Leaders’ many daily initiatives.
" The big one was filling the cavity in my walls... The only reason I haven't already... is I didn' t have a cavity to fill . "
How’s this work if one doesn’t live in a brand new SE semi, that’s doing it’s bit for global warming by the DPM concreting over all that’s left of what’s green to build it and keep all those new young voters happy and out of the red (or in it, votes wise)?
Just popped on, is it? No can change, no arguments? Ker-ching! I live in an existing house, that takes no more emissions to make. And I’m making it as eco as I can. Partly for the planet; partly for my wallet – I have just popped in a solar dehumidifier for my cellar - http://www.junkk.com/index.asp?slevel=0z0z893&parent_id=893 - which I’m road-testing on these bases for our next newsletter, and so far it’s looking good.
Like Justin, I don’t have a cavity to fill, but can think of a few some can stick it in if this is just another ring-fenced, public pension pot revenue generator at my expense in the name of green.'
'The plumbing, ethical, financial and environmental bits are pretty much covered. Despite the £300, I’d say go for it.
I needed to upgrade my system a while ago, so bolted on the rad valves to the boiler upgrade, as a lot of the costs were in the flushing of the system anyway, and the guys were there. Saves a trip cost. More of a dilemma when it’s just for the valves.
Maybe combine with the annual service? Get in quick before winter comes (if it does). And make sure they put things on the right way! 25% of ours are on backwards and hammer if they are not full on or off.
Now I’m going on to a real concern about another section raised in the piece, thanks to what looks like one of our Dear (as in ‘fine if you don’t; you pay not to get fined so do) Leaders’ many daily initiatives.
" The big one was filling the cavity in my walls... The only reason I haven't already... is I didn' t have a cavity to fill . "
How’s this work if one doesn’t live in a brand new SE semi, that’s doing it’s bit for global warming by the DPM concreting over all that’s left of what’s green to build it and keep all those new young voters happy and out of the red (or in it, votes wise)?
Just popped on, is it? No can change, no arguments? Ker-ching! I live in an existing house, that takes no more emissions to make. And I’m making it as eco as I can. Partly for the planet; partly for my wallet – I have just popped in a solar dehumidifier for my cellar - http://www.junkk.com/index.asp?slevel=0z0z893&parent_id=893 - which I’m road-testing on these bases for our next newsletter, and so far it’s looking good.
Like Justin, I don’t have a cavity to fill, but can think of a few some can stick it in if this is just another ring-fenced, public pension pot revenue generator at my expense in the name of green.'
Dr. Junkk Writes...
... for Newsnight: Foraging with care
"A late blooming comment, as it were. Still relevant to the last post (da, da..... da, tat tat tat-tat, dee tat, tat, tat-tat)
While I'm all for going au naturel locally, if it's out of your allotment (and frankly, even if it is) do be very, very careful on the hygiene aspects. At the very least make sure you get it home and wash it within an inch of losing all nutritional value.
Having just nursed a wife through two weeks of food poisoning (no clue how, the rest of us were fine), I don't think our finances, the health service or the environment were served too well during this period."
"A late blooming comment, as it were. Still relevant to the last post (da, da..... da, tat tat tat-tat, dee tat, tat, tat-tat)
While I'm all for going au naturel locally, if it's out of your allotment (and frankly, even if it is) do be very, very careful on the hygiene aspects. At the very least make sure you get it home and wash it within an inch of losing all nutritional value.
Having just nursed a wife through two weeks of food poisoning (no clue how, the rest of us were fine), I don't think our finances, the health service or the environment were served too well during this period."
If you are what you eat, this is a worry.
TOP TEN TRENDS FOR 2007
Mintel has identified what will be hitting supermarket shelves in 2007.
They asked if we thought these trends important. Silly boys and girls:
"Oh yes, they are important. Good to see this "..With a love of nature comes a deeper commitment to ethical products.." and this "..Refillable packaging has a strong opportunity to make its mark as consumers are increasingly looking for more ways to save natural resources". Though I'm not sure how they equate to this "..exotic fruits such as açaà and cupuaçu [wow, those babies did for my Spellchecker!) continuing their rise to fame..", food miles wise. But as my fellow Geordie-centric poster points out, I'm still wondering when the whole issue moves from Prius (as a 2nd car) Person to Mondeo Man (R-Reg. Can't afford an LPG convert)."
Mintel has identified what will be hitting supermarket shelves in 2007.
They asked if we thought these trends important. Silly boys and girls:
"Oh yes, they are important. Good to see this "..With a love of nature comes a deeper commitment to ethical products.." and this "..Refillable packaging has a strong opportunity to make its mark as consumers are increasingly looking for more ways to save natural resources". Though I'm not sure how they equate to this "..exotic fruits such as açaà and cupuaçu [wow, those babies did for my Spellchecker!) continuing their rise to fame..", food miles wise. But as my fellow Geordie-centric poster points out, I'm still wondering when the whole issue moves from Prius (as a 2nd car) Person to Mondeo Man (R-Reg. Can't afford an LPG convert)."
No Green Port Left
Sorry, I came over all nautical. It's just that I kind of associate Green with Left, and that's how... oh forget it.
The point is, I was floored just now by this: Green my ride
A non rant, average person-friendly, pragmatic... useful article in the Grauniad Love the pop-up for 2 business class seast to Dubai, guys. I can occupy twice the space to go look at them make the oil we're burning:)
Long my they do more.
Plus I feel oodles better about my Volvo. I could... probably... afford to convert to LPG. But I don't trust Gordo, and so far the makers say I can't, while the converters say I can.
The point is, I was floored just now by this: Green my ride
A non rant, average person-friendly, pragmatic... useful article in the Grauniad Love the pop-up for 2 business class seast to Dubai, guys. I can occupy twice the space to go look at them make the oil we're burning:)
Long my they do more.
Plus I feel oodles better about my Volvo. I could... probably... afford to convert to LPG. But I don't trust Gordo, and so far the makers say I can't, while the converters say I can.
So little rare. Or well done.
I hope I don't get in trouble for the whole Nazi allusion thing (what with Ken having a spot 'o bother with this recently), but I'm still banging away. I don't know why. One recent one I devoted a while to ended up with a few hundred replies. I doubt the author read them all.
Still, this does get bigger than the environment: Make them all pay £25 to drive in London
First they came for the 4x4s, and I did not speak (They are a bit much, if not really necessary; a bit like drinking six pints. Still, it's a free country).
Then they came for the 'bigger' cars, and I managed an eyebrow raise (they are what some of us, not on ex's, who pay for our own trips, use to transport a bit more than our single selves to work in. Or simply can be a lot cheaper on a cost/per mile/opportunity cost basis - you'll find that when it's a family outing).
And then they came for my pint (it takes a lot of water to make one), and as it actually impinged on me getting bladdered each night I was miffed, though by then it was too late.
But hey ho, at least I can now still enjoy a healthy glass of designer mineral water in my favourite H20 bar.. er..
As this is a national newspaper, I would estimate that not everyone lives and/or works in (as in 'in') London. I'm sure many do, though perhaps not within striking range of a tube or a bus that works.
But sadly, for all sorts of reasons, we all may need to travel there. No one does that trip unless you have to.
Now it may be daily, and if we're stinking rich and live in the 'burbs or beyond, we simply add to our Aston and Shogun a Prius... and Ken's Your Daddy: you can enter Bryony's patch free as a bird, and buzz about all day emitting away (electricity - be it hybrid or whiz-bang - gets generated and distributed, and not very efficiently in the latter case, somewhere).
Or if you're not so rich, you can try and lug a bit more into the exhibition than your journalistic utility belt of Alka Seltzer (Nice. Hope the liver holds out for the spawning thing), and pay an extra £25 for the privilege, despite the fact that you are now mostly emitting ... nothing.
So Ken has never used a Taxi then? Or been conveyed in some other form of vehicular transport (I'm sure he took the tube to Heathrow with is entourage to pop off to visit his mates on those fact finding tours, and they cycled them all around). I don't deny him the need, or right to so it. It is simply necessary to do your job. So that first few paras is either tunnel visioned or wilfully simplistic.
Other than being a modest-income earner's worst nightmare, and hence sure-fire vote loser, if it was about the environment wouldn't taxing the amount of stuff that goes in the fuel tank (regularly), in combination with what comes out the pipe (exhaust or power station - electricity comes with an e-cost) as a miles covered-fee (as opposed to a one off purchase tariff), be a) fairer and b) better for emissions control?
Divide and conquer is a great way to grab control. It's not so good for democratic change and social cohesion.
We expect it from the pols. When the media offer their support I despair.
This planet needs sensible action. Not hot air, hype and silly, divisive gestures.
And as a % of the whole greenhouse thing what are London's private car emissions, anyway? Say versus the non fuel-taxed skiing trips to Verbier? Or the non energy-saving bulbs burning in city offices? Or the poorly insulated homes? Or those that can't afford high-efficiency boilers... etc?
Fewer targets & penalties; more effective actions & incentives, please.
Still, this does get bigger than the environment: Make them all pay £25 to drive in London
First they came for the 4x4s, and I did not speak (They are a bit much, if not really necessary; a bit like drinking six pints. Still, it's a free country).
Then they came for the 'bigger' cars, and I managed an eyebrow raise (they are what some of us, not on ex's, who pay for our own trips, use to transport a bit more than our single selves to work in. Or simply can be a lot cheaper on a cost/per mile/opportunity cost basis - you'll find that when it's a family outing).
And then they came for my pint (it takes a lot of water to make one), and as it actually impinged on me getting bladdered each night I was miffed, though by then it was too late.
But hey ho, at least I can now still enjoy a healthy glass of designer mineral water in my favourite H20 bar.. er..
As this is a national newspaper, I would estimate that not everyone lives and/or works in (as in 'in') London. I'm sure many do, though perhaps not within striking range of a tube or a bus that works.
But sadly, for all sorts of reasons, we all may need to travel there. No one does that trip unless you have to.
Now it may be daily, and if we're stinking rich and live in the 'burbs or beyond, we simply add to our Aston and Shogun a Prius... and Ken's Your Daddy: you can enter Bryony's patch free as a bird, and buzz about all day emitting away (electricity - be it hybrid or whiz-bang - gets generated and distributed, and not very efficiently in the latter case, somewhere).
Or if you're not so rich, you can try and lug a bit more into the exhibition than your journalistic utility belt of Alka Seltzer (Nice. Hope the liver holds out for the spawning thing), and pay an extra £25 for the privilege, despite the fact that you are now mostly emitting ... nothing.
So Ken has never used a Taxi then? Or been conveyed in some other form of vehicular transport (I'm sure he took the tube to Heathrow with is entourage to pop off to visit his mates on those fact finding tours, and they cycled them all around). I don't deny him the need, or right to so it. It is simply necessary to do your job. So that first few paras is either tunnel visioned or wilfully simplistic.
Other than being a modest-income earner's worst nightmare, and hence sure-fire vote loser, if it was about the environment wouldn't taxing the amount of stuff that goes in the fuel tank (regularly), in combination with what comes out the pipe (exhaust or power station - electricity comes with an e-cost) as a miles covered-fee (as opposed to a one off purchase tariff), be a) fairer and b) better for emissions control?
Divide and conquer is a great way to grab control. It's not so good for democratic change and social cohesion.
We expect it from the pols. When the media offer their support I despair.
This planet needs sensible action. Not hot air, hype and silly, divisive gestures.
And as a % of the whole greenhouse thing what are London's private car emissions, anyway? Say versus the non fuel-taxed skiing trips to Verbier? Or the non energy-saving bulbs burning in city offices? Or the poorly insulated homes? Or those that can't afford high-efficiency boilers... etc?
Fewer targets & penalties; more effective actions & incentives, please.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Incoming!
I leapt into dangerous waters, regarding a sacred, cash cow.
Driving a 4x4? That'll be £25 a day, please
"I live in the country (some of us do).
I don't have a 4x4, or a big engined car (some of us do.. and a few probably need them).
I come into London a fair bit (some of us have to, lugging stuff, ironically in my case to share the joys of saving the planet).
For those of us juggling our finances, an electric or hybrid is looking a pretty good idea (except for the lugging bit), which seems the intention.
So if I am rich enough to have a 4x4/biggie (ignoring those, for instance growing our 'buy local' crops who may not be, and who don't live in London. Or have an old car), forget the train, I simply buy myself another (5-25% of total eco-cost in manufacture, depending on who you believe), to spend most of my time lugging a battery down the motorway, to buzz about for free the last few miles.
At which point it stops all day filling up space. Or can buzz about cranking out emissions (batteries do need to get charged somehow, and not that efficiently, using fossil fuels) for free.
Hmmn.
Other than being a modest-income earner's worst nightmare, and hence sure-fire vote loser, wouldn't taxing the amount of stuff that goes in the fuel tank (regularly) in combination with what comes out the pipe (exhaust or power station - electricity comes with an e-cost) as a miles covered-fee be a) fairer and b) better for emissions control?
Or was the latter perhaps not the point?
The first casualty in a spin war is trust.
What a sad debate for the capital city of a country who accounts for a fraction of total global emmissions, and talks and gestures its way into the future, while the majority who don't have such cars get distracted from real issues and actions that can make a difference."
Driving a 4x4? That'll be £25 a day, please
"I live in the country (some of us do).
I don't have a 4x4, or a big engined car (some of us do.. and a few probably need them).
I come into London a fair bit (some of us have to, lugging stuff, ironically in my case to share the joys of saving the planet).
For those of us juggling our finances, an electric or hybrid is looking a pretty good idea (except for the lugging bit), which seems the intention.
So if I am rich enough to have a 4x4/biggie (ignoring those, for instance growing our 'buy local' crops who may not be, and who don't live in London. Or have an old car), forget the train, I simply buy myself another (5-25% of total eco-cost in manufacture, depending on who you believe), to spend most of my time lugging a battery down the motorway, to buzz about for free the last few miles.
At which point it stops all day filling up space. Or can buzz about cranking out emissions (batteries do need to get charged somehow, and not that efficiently, using fossil fuels) for free.
Hmmn.
Other than being a modest-income earner's worst nightmare, and hence sure-fire vote loser, wouldn't taxing the amount of stuff that goes in the fuel tank (regularly) in combination with what comes out the pipe (exhaust or power station - electricity comes with an e-cost) as a miles covered-fee be a) fairer and b) better for emissions control?
Or was the latter perhaps not the point?
The first casualty in a spin war is trust.
What a sad debate for the capital city of a country who accounts for a fraction of total global emmissions, and talks and gestures its way into the future, while the majority who don't have such cars get distracted from real issues and actions that can make a difference."
Head Over Parapet.. Commence!
I've posted a couple in the Guardian today.
Both to David Miliband at the UN climate change conference: day two
"I'm trying to get a grip who is saying what, and with luck doing the same thing. Or, more likely, another.
Sorry to kick off with the Indy, but with a front page that has all the political party logos to the left and the UKIP logo and a picture of Mr. Blair - not his party - to the right (no comment) I have read this today: "David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, wants to extend the carbon trading scheme to include more businesses such as hotels and supermarkets. But Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, is resisting the idea."
But then in this fine tome I now read '...reports of a clash with the chancellor, Gordon Brown, were " ridiculous".
May I ask who thinks what, and who gets the casting vote on environmental matters in government?
And what, precisely, will this country's stance be, and the consequences to industry and the voting population.
Please can we have some tangibles, and with luck avoiding the word 'targets'.
I've watched a succession of his Ministerial eco-colleagues been given a daily 3 minutes on BBC Breakfast TV trot out waffle, and when posed questions on real-life, actions (such as VAT breaks on e-friendly home improvements), the best I've heard so far is 'it's tricky, and were looking at it'.
Hope the weather's nice there."
Second, to anyone, really
"In posting before, a little ad popped up telling me that I could save 30% on my energy bills by popping in a wind turbine. Sounds a plan. But is this so? I have also recently read (Mail on Sunday, sorry) that they may not be such a good idea, not just financially but environmentally.
Meanwhile, it seems a good idea to buy a hybrid. Only I don't live in London (some of us don't - and the nearest train station is 40 minutes way, and at 4x the fare, let's not go there here) and lugging a battery down the M4 apparently isn't too smart either.
With major political leaders advocating, and in some cases stuffing through either laws against or incentives for such things daily, and such contradictory advice either in support or against, its all a tad confusing for the poor consumer.
When are we going to see some sense talked by the political and green elites (activist and media) that don't presume we all live in a house in Putney, can all afford to offset our Perrier and jaunts to Klosters, and whack up a solar panel on the nanny flat each week?
I know there are a lot of folk out there struggling along with mortgages, kids, holiday plans, relative overseas etc, who are not only seeing a bit much on the fine or tax front that will affect the minority of those who can afford it not one jot. And precious little on the incentive front that can help those who want to do something but need help and non-agenda-driven guidance that works for them and the planet.
Speaking of which, while recycling is dead good and all, is it perhaps not getting a bit too much of the lion’s share of the target-driven culture that serves box-tickers and makes a lot of folk big money (quangos, ad agencies, local composting officer salaries/pensions, waste contractors)? A few tens of millions of folk spending a minute a day sorting out their waste is a heck of a wage bill saved. But it isn't too satisfying or anything other than emotionally rewarding on an individual level.
Reduction can be equally unattractive (but doesn't have to be). But let me pitch something that can help a tad and be both fun and rewarding: repair and reuse. Try http//:www.junkk.com for a start."
Shame I cocked up the URL, though! D'oh!
Both to David Miliband at the UN climate change conference: day two
"I'm trying to get a grip who is saying what, and with luck doing the same thing. Or, more likely, another.
Sorry to kick off with the Indy, but with a front page that has all the political party logos to the left and the UKIP logo and a picture of Mr. Blair - not his party - to the right (no comment) I have read this today: "David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, wants to extend the carbon trading scheme to include more businesses such as hotels and supermarkets. But Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, is resisting the idea."
But then in this fine tome I now read '...reports of a clash with the chancellor, Gordon Brown, were " ridiculous".
May I ask who thinks what, and who gets the casting vote on environmental matters in government?
And what, precisely, will this country's stance be, and the consequences to industry and the voting population.
Please can we have some tangibles, and with luck avoiding the word 'targets'.
I've watched a succession of his Ministerial eco-colleagues been given a daily 3 minutes on BBC Breakfast TV trot out waffle, and when posed questions on real-life, actions (such as VAT breaks on e-friendly home improvements), the best I've heard so far is 'it's tricky, and were looking at it'.
Hope the weather's nice there."
Second, to anyone, really
"In posting before, a little ad popped up telling me that I could save 30% on my energy bills by popping in a wind turbine. Sounds a plan. But is this so? I have also recently read (Mail on Sunday, sorry) that they may not be such a good idea, not just financially but environmentally.
Meanwhile, it seems a good idea to buy a hybrid. Only I don't live in London (some of us don't - and the nearest train station is 40 minutes way, and at 4x the fare, let's not go there here) and lugging a battery down the M4 apparently isn't too smart either.
With major political leaders advocating, and in some cases stuffing through either laws against or incentives for such things daily, and such contradictory advice either in support or against, its all a tad confusing for the poor consumer.
When are we going to see some sense talked by the political and green elites (activist and media) that don't presume we all live in a house in Putney, can all afford to offset our Perrier and jaunts to Klosters, and whack up a solar panel on the nanny flat each week?
I know there are a lot of folk out there struggling along with mortgages, kids, holiday plans, relative overseas etc, who are not only seeing a bit much on the fine or tax front that will affect the minority of those who can afford it not one jot. And precious little on the incentive front that can help those who want to do something but need help and non-agenda-driven guidance that works for them and the planet.
Speaking of which, while recycling is dead good and all, is it perhaps not getting a bit too much of the lion’s share of the target-driven culture that serves box-tickers and makes a lot of folk big money (quangos, ad agencies, local composting officer salaries/pensions, waste contractors)? A few tens of millions of folk spending a minute a day sorting out their waste is a heck of a wage bill saved. But it isn't too satisfying or anything other than emotionally rewarding on an individual level.
Reduction can be equally unattractive (but doesn't have to be). But let me pitch something that can help a tad and be both fun and rewarding: repair and reuse. Try http//:www.junkk.com for a start."
Shame I cocked up the URL, though! D'oh!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)