Like I always say, as he asked...
'Take a look at Mashable’s list of 75 green tweets and see how many you would really want in your Twitter window every day.'
Green web awards: upwards, onwards
I was grateful for that list, and pleased to add a few more I did not already have.
But you are right, a few really didn't seem to float my boat at all. Not to say some were not sincere or well done, but I found many that resided at the two extremes that frustrate me most (other than the two at each end of (A)GW), either preaching to a very faithful hairshirt flock in such a way as to repel 'liter' greens still keen to find out and change, to high-end fashionistas way above my pay grade. I am more Fiesta Family on a Friday Tesco run for the whole week rather than Prius Person using the wicker basket bike to get organic veg for a dinner do at the weekend Devon retreat.
Personally (and flying a wee selfish, self-promo flag here), I think (and hope) the future is in the hands of those who seek to inspire rather than hector, reward rather than punish and educate/entertain rather than strike fear or promote guilt.
It's a great world. We should enjoy every moment of making it even better, even when we are rolling up our sleeves to help support it while in need.
Thinking back, I believe I entered Junkk.com. Hope this little effort hasn't scr*wed our chances
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Not a lot, little 'Ern, not a lot
A wee while ago I raised the notion of 'Survival of the Selfish'
This is a worthy evolutionary addition to that:
What use is evolution to environmentalists?
The question of course depends on what aspect of environmentalism one is referring to, but outside of nature's self (as far is she is able without man's malign influence)-regulation, if it's to do with the bigger picture of (A)GW and various global hoo-haas/negotiations I fear that is a boat long since sailed.
There is a certain irony that, to read the full text, you have to pay. That is life, if not one Nature had factored in, perhaps.
This is a worthy evolutionary addition to that:
What use is evolution to environmentalists?
The question of course depends on what aspect of environmentalism one is referring to, but outside of nature's self (as far is she is able without man's malign influence)-regulation, if it's to do with the bigger picture of (A)GW and various global hoo-haas/negotiations I fear that is a boat long since sailed.
There is a certain irony that, to read the full text, you have to pay. That is life, if not one Nature had factored in, perhaps.
The TOL Bar - e-will
Still grappling with an unhealthy addiction to twitter.
It's just that it... is... so... darn... useful for new info, usually linked.
Soooo hard to resist.
And, often, soooo hard not to either RT or draft a reply, which with a total of 140 characters (inc. original) can be a challenge; one that takes time.
But I know it is detracting from here.
The solution, I think is a compromise (for now): I'll keep up with both, but cut down on the rehashing (#re - that is more apt than you think) as frankly a lot of folk just shunt the same info or opinion around endlessly, and try and focus on adding value.
I cannot claim to get hold of much original 'news', so this means, mainly, data and/or ideas.
As here, in the latest 'Thinking Out Loud" label post.
It has been inspired by this:
What happens to email after you die
Inspired but, ironically, little actually to do with its main premise, more on personal privacy.
I'm thinking the 'cost' of online existence.
Already, I daily 'enjoy' gigabytes of stuff flowing in, much of which I don't even look at at all much less skip. I tend to keep 'em all 'cos I'm hoarder by nature, but also the 'missing the nugget in the tailings' fear. I should cancel many... most, but don't. Just in case. And, heck, they might appreciate the numbers on the ratings board.
But what about when I pop off or, as seems more likely, one day suffer info overload rage and decide to really get back to my shed and hope a passing airship full of VCs and journalists passes over head and sees my latest creation?
Plugs may well get pulled, but I doubt that much will happen to the outpouring, though the size of in-box caches may well eventually lead to a blockage. Maybe even a 'full' sign that properly washed mailings will pick up on and self-cancel.
But for the rest...?
Maybe the creation of some kind of e-will of things to cancel might leave a legacy that helps the planet as well, if in a small way? It might need some effort to set up and carry out, plus the scary notion of post-mortem access to passwords, but I wonder if it may be worth it?
It's just that it... is... so... darn... useful for new info, usually linked.
Soooo hard to resist.
And, often, soooo hard not to either RT or draft a reply, which with a total of 140 characters (inc. original) can be a challenge; one that takes time.
But I know it is detracting from here.
The solution, I think is a compromise (for now): I'll keep up with both, but cut down on the rehashing (#re - that is more apt than you think) as frankly a lot of folk just shunt the same info or opinion around endlessly, and try and focus on adding value.
I cannot claim to get hold of much original 'news', so this means, mainly, data and/or ideas.
As here, in the latest 'Thinking Out Loud" label post.
It has been inspired by this:
What happens to email after you die
Inspired but, ironically, little actually to do with its main premise, more on personal privacy.
I'm thinking the 'cost' of online existence.
Already, I daily 'enjoy' gigabytes of stuff flowing in, much of which I don't even look at at all much less skip. I tend to keep 'em all 'cos I'm hoarder by nature, but also the 'missing the nugget in the tailings' fear. I should cancel many... most, but don't. Just in case. And, heck, they might appreciate the numbers on the ratings board.
But what about when I pop off or, as seems more likely, one day suffer info overload rage and decide to really get back to my shed and hope a passing airship full of VCs and journalists passes over head and sees my latest creation?
Plugs may well get pulled, but I doubt that much will happen to the outpouring, though the size of in-box caches may well eventually lead to a blockage. Maybe even a 'full' sign that properly washed mailings will pick up on and self-cancel.
But for the rest...?
Maybe the creation of some kind of e-will of things to cancel might leave a legacy that helps the planet as well, if in a small way? It might need some effort to set up and carry out, plus the scary notion of post-mortem access to passwords, but I wonder if it may be worth it?
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
A site for sore eyes, ears...
Every so often a site comes along that I just like.
This is one such: unclutterer.com
For no better reason than that, I am happy to share:)
This is one such: unclutterer.com
For no better reason than that, I am happy to share:)
Climate of confusion
Newsnight is one of the more significant news/current affairs programmes we have in this country.
That's not saying a lot.
I watched this, and the protagonists selected, with my jaw on the ground.
How much has changed?
Just watched the chat... 'legally-binding' came up a lot. Lot of eggs in the kitchen?
I just hope that, whatever does get discussed, agreed, and bound up, most people will move beyond the fact that a treaty has been established to what it's actually committing folk to and with what in mind.
With the current level of global boxtickocracy and short-term legacy jockeying, I'll be fascinated whether emissions actually get reduced, or just shunted around a lot more as various interested parties take their cut.
Monday 9 November 2009
Just now watched Mr. Rowlatt's kitchen cabinet meeting.
If this is the calibre of political heft and serious journalism surrounding this huge, complex, vital issue that we may expect... oh.
I do indeed now expect that President 'only if it's going to look good' O will swing by to bestow blessings on a bit of a thing... and no one present, observing or hoping to be adequately informed will end up having the slightest clue who has committed to what and whether it will make a blind bit of difference - save to boost business and first class seat uptake, convention hotel and 5 star restaurant bookings, and a few folks' golf handicaps. These things always seem to happen, a lot, in nice places.
Meanwhile populations will grow, economies will need to expand, forests will be felled, green fields will turn first brown and then get concreted over, affordably, runways will be added, nukes will get commissioned... and a BBC 'science' moppet will point at the business end of a Tesla as others will Copenhagen and declaim 'Look... it's not emitting, and meeting all sorts of lovely bonus-driving, fine-avoiding, lobby-pleasing targets'. So long as such things make sense environmentally and practically in complement with other socio-economic parameters, fine. If not, its just a silly game, with the only winners being those on the pitch and a few in the sponsors' and media boxes, with the rest paying.
However, it is not enough to observe and/or critique, so when the opportunity presents I will grab it:
Update on your questions for Ed Miliband
What will be the outcome to total global emissions of a 'successful' outcome?
Then... where from? Up or down? Country by country, industry by industry. Plus cost impositions... or gains, as a consequence.
And of these what % will be tangible, practical, genuine enviROI+ reductions, and what % redistribution or redesignation?
How, with expanding populations encroaching or dependent on ever more territory and resources can the growing economy mantra from all governments to support these be satisfied without further increases in consumption and hence pollution vs. in the situation suggested, held and reduced?
There is no such thing as a free lunch. What, honestly, is going to have to give? In terms a worker in a factory making stuff to sell and be consumed can relate to job wise, to the lifestyle-centric mind of a student with an eye on the latest iPhone or LCD TV from John Lewis (non-list) can relate to. For good or ill.
In committing all efforts and funds to avoiding/mitigating the potential consequences of (A)GW, has any thought been given to the possibility that it is (now/already, as claimed by some in high office) unavoidable (whatever the cause) and contingencies made to support best practice coping mechanisms?
Or are all bets on 'man' being the sole cause, and hence all efforts by our race should be committed to reversing our impacts?
In case this proves incorrect, and/or the efforts made prove ineffective/insufficient, what will be the consequences to this country?
I am hoping he might answer some, and the key ones, and not waffle. Or choose a distracting line.
I have tried to be careful to avoid any hint that my concern is on whether PMWNCC is happening as per any 'line' or fact to prevent the inevitable extreme artillery barrages. My interest is in what he and his merry crew have actually considered or, and equally important, not considered around the consequences of a 'warming' planet.
I just had a mate call me up in a rage. He took the now redundant RE:boxes to the bring site as his new green wheelie has arrived to improve things. They wouldn't take it and suggested he pop over the road and pop it in the landfill skip. Somewhere a box is binned and another is ticked or a target in one area is met that is not counted against one lost in another. And a planet weeps another tear.
But I will never stop trying to find tangible, practical, enviROI+ solutions wherever and whenever I can. Always have (wow, was it 5 years ago? And those boxes had years left in them yet). Always will. If I am able.
That's not saying a lot.
I watched this, and the protagonists selected, with my jaw on the ground.
How much has changed?
Just watched the chat... 'legally-binding' came up a lot. Lot of eggs in the kitchen?
I just hope that, whatever does get discussed, agreed, and bound up, most people will move beyond the fact that a treaty has been established to what it's actually committing folk to and with what in mind.
With the current level of global boxtickocracy and short-term legacy jockeying, I'll be fascinated whether emissions actually get reduced, or just shunted around a lot more as various interested parties take their cut.
Monday 9 November 2009
Just now watched Mr. Rowlatt's kitchen cabinet meeting.
If this is the calibre of political heft and serious journalism surrounding this huge, complex, vital issue that we may expect... oh.
I do indeed now expect that President 'only if it's going to look good' O will swing by to bestow blessings on a bit of a thing... and no one present, observing or hoping to be adequately informed will end up having the slightest clue who has committed to what and whether it will make a blind bit of difference - save to boost business and first class seat uptake, convention hotel and 5 star restaurant bookings, and a few folks' golf handicaps. These things always seem to happen, a lot, in nice places.
Meanwhile populations will grow, economies will need to expand, forests will be felled, green fields will turn first brown and then get concreted over, affordably, runways will be added, nukes will get commissioned... and a BBC 'science' moppet will point at the business end of a Tesla as others will Copenhagen and declaim 'Look... it's not emitting, and meeting all sorts of lovely bonus-driving, fine-avoiding, lobby-pleasing targets'. So long as such things make sense environmentally and practically in complement with other socio-economic parameters, fine. If not, its just a silly game, with the only winners being those on the pitch and a few in the sponsors' and media boxes, with the rest paying.
However, it is not enough to observe and/or critique, so when the opportunity presents I will grab it:
Update on your questions for Ed Miliband
What will be the outcome to total global emissions of a 'successful' outcome?
Then... where from? Up or down? Country by country, industry by industry. Plus cost impositions... or gains, as a consequence.
And of these what % will be tangible, practical, genuine enviROI+ reductions, and what % redistribution or redesignation?
How, with expanding populations encroaching or dependent on ever more territory and resources can the growing economy mantra from all governments to support these be satisfied without further increases in consumption and hence pollution vs. in the situation suggested, held and reduced?
There is no such thing as a free lunch. What, honestly, is going to have to give? In terms a worker in a factory making stuff to sell and be consumed can relate to job wise, to the lifestyle-centric mind of a student with an eye on the latest iPhone or LCD TV from John Lewis (non-list) can relate to. For good or ill.
In committing all efforts and funds to avoiding/mitigating the potential consequences of (A)GW, has any thought been given to the possibility that it is (now/already, as claimed by some in high office) unavoidable (whatever the cause) and contingencies made to support best practice coping mechanisms?
Or are all bets on 'man' being the sole cause, and hence all efforts by our race should be committed to reversing our impacts?
In case this proves incorrect, and/or the efforts made prove ineffective/insufficient, what will be the consequences to this country?
I am hoping he might answer some, and the key ones, and not waffle. Or choose a distracting line.
I have tried to be careful to avoid any hint that my concern is on whether PMWNCC is happening as per any 'line' or fact to prevent the inevitable extreme artillery barrages. My interest is in what he and his merry crew have actually considered or, and equally important, not considered around the consequences of a 'warming' planet.
I just had a mate call me up in a rage. He took the now redundant RE:boxes to the bring site as his new green wheelie has arrived to improve things. They wouldn't take it and suggested he pop over the road and pop it in the landfill skip. Somewhere a box is binned and another is ticked or a target in one area is met that is not counted against one lost in another. And a planet weeps another tear.
But I will never stop trying to find tangible, practical, enviROI+ solutions wherever and whenever I can. Always have (wow, was it 5 years ago? And those boxes had years left in them yet). Always will. If I am able.
Monday, November 09, 2009
RE:PAIR - Want tips with that?
Top 10 Clever Fixes for Your Broken Stuff
And if you ever need a place to go to find stuff to fix things with....
And if you ever need a place to go to find stuff to fix things with....
Sunday, November 08, 2009
The SADIM Touch
You'll need to think about it a tad (hint, in every direction)
Just seems some have it, and the rest of us are cursed that they do.
Inspired by some noting a certain person did not wish 'bon voyage' to the UK World Heavyweight boxing (now) champ.
Just seems some have it, and the rest of us are cursed that they do.
Inspired by some noting a certain person did not wish 'bon voyage' to the UK World Heavyweight boxing (now) champ.
Friday, November 06, 2009
We need more good news today
Freiburg lights way to energy savings
We don't say: 'Reduce your mobility.' What we try to do is create better alternatives," explained Dieter Wörner, the city's environment chief.
We don't say: 'Reduce your mobility.' What we try to do is create better alternatives," explained Dieter Wörner, the city's environment chief.
CATEGORY - FOOD WASTE DISPOSAL
I engaged in a wee mission a while ago in complement. To try and get a better structure across the topic from now on:
ARTICLES
Sink your waste
Comparison of Carbon Footprint - bear in mind this is from the site of a company that advocates putting stuff in it's products.
Recycling & Waste World - WRAP’s food waste report comes under fire - I do believe Junkkly eyebrow was cokced a while ago in this regard. Mind you, I also had an issue with some aspects of their critic's products (which also apply to any composter), namely the caution on inhaling fungal spores.
Indy - Waste watchers: Save cash and the environment
Times - NEW - Shanks builds first anaerobic digestion plant to harness potato peel power
INFORMATION
ARTICLES
Sink your waste
Comparison of Carbon Footprint - bear in mind this is from the site of a company that advocates putting stuff in it's products.
Recycling & Waste World - WRAP’s food waste report comes under fire - I do believe Junkkly eyebrow was cokced a while ago in this regard. Mind you, I also had an issue with some aspects of their critic's products (which also apply to any composter), namely the caution on inhaling fungal spores.
Indy - Waste watchers: Save cash and the environment
Times - NEW - Shanks builds first anaerobic digestion plant to harness potato peel power
INFORMATION
GREEN TIP - Make your tumble dryer more energy efficient
From espares
'Course, not having one at all can be even better.
We are managing using a combo of dryer stands in the sun in the spare room and a new 'zone' created over the emmersion heater.
'Course, not having one at all can be even better.
We are managing using a combo of dryer stands in the sun in the spare room and a new 'zone' created over the emmersion heater.
A good share is a joy forvever...
'Thought this might appeal to you'
It did, has and thank you Solarventi:
- a museum constructed out of, and using exhibits of, recycled/reused materials.
See http://www.citymuseum.org/about.html
Having to use a 'related' Label 'til I can figure out how to purge or exceed the Blogger 2k (a lot of labels!) limit
It did, has and thank you Solarventi:
- a museum constructed out of, and using exhibits of, recycled/reused materials.
See http://www.citymuseum.org/about.html
Having to use a 'related' Label 'til I can figure out how to purge or exceed the Blogger 2k (a lot of labels!) limit
Thursday, November 05, 2009
RE:trograde steps
Been a bit distracted of late. Sorry.
Mainly on a major competition entry, though after the last few I am not sure why I bother; where green judges heads are seem seldom the same planet I am operating to save.
The intense nature of this has meant my only 'blog breaks' have been scattered and short, so I have vented more on the twitter page. Worth staying abreast.
However, here I return, and not with good news... at least of others.
When you beaver about town on foot or bike you notice a lot more, and can stop more easily.
And so I have come to mourn the passing of some iconic re:initiatives this week.
First up Spokes, who old me the very bike I use now. A great idea for both planet and local employment.
Then RE:Box, to whom I contributed name and design. Sadly no more.
But there are glimmers of green shoots. 'The Can Do Crew!' is a force to be reckoned with, and rethreads are out and about and collecting textiles still, which new systems can or will not.
Both proudly using the names I coined and logos I created for them.
For a looooong time more, I do hope.
Monday, November 02, 2009
AWARD - Green Web Awards
AWARD
WHEN: Now, until, er, later
WHAT: Green Web Awards
WHAT... MORE?: From the blurb: annual awards for the best green websites, social media and digital activity, run by Nigel’s Eco Store .
In 2008 they asked some of the web’s leading environmental bloggers and social media users [not asked for some reason, guess I'm not 'leading'...yet;)]to name their favourite green sites in twelve categories. We wanted to celebrate the best and worst of the green web.
This year, following some great feedback on our blog, they’ve decided to make the awards a tad more democratic. [Must check out that great feedback that resulted in such a welcome enhancement]
HOW MUCH: FREEEEEEE!
URL: http://www.nigelsecostore.com/green-web-awards/
COMMENTS: Modesty prevents and all that.... but if a kind person or two would feel so disposed to put in a good word. I note we still have leading green judges from many previous awards of note, so this blog has a hope in hell, but the Junkk.com site deserves to get a fair crack
WHEN: Now, until, er, later
WHAT: Green Web Awards
WHAT... MORE?: From the blurb: annual awards for the best green websites, social media and digital activity, run by Nigel’s Eco Store .
In 2008 they asked some of the web’s leading environmental bloggers and social media users [not asked for some reason, guess I'm not 'leading'...yet;)]to name their favourite green sites in twelve categories. We wanted to celebrate the best and worst of the green web.
This year, following some great feedback on our blog, they’ve decided to make the awards a tad more democratic. [Must check out that great feedback that resulted in such a welcome enhancement]
HOW MUCH: FREEEEEEE!
URL: http://www.nigelsecostore.com/green-web-awards/
COMMENTS: Modesty prevents and all that.... but if a kind person or two would feel so disposed to put in a good word. I note we still have leading green judges from many previous awards of note, so this blog has a hope in hell, but the Junkk.com site deserves to get a fair crack
Friday, October 30, 2009
CATEGORY - CARBON CAPTURE
A new one that looks to be topical. As always, share and share alike.
Articles
The Register - Brown gov will make 'big commitment' to carbon capture - Big as in small - Nowt like backing a winner!
Greenbang - Carbon capture as much use a chocolate teapot: Greenpeace - Bless
Guardian - Can technology save the climate?
Indy - UK's climate change plans incoherent, says scientist - Oi, Gordon, I think a tabloid has another plastic bag opp for you to devote your energies to.
Greenbang - Think tank gives roadmap for carbon capture in the UK - So the technology is sound...phew. It's just how it gets specified, used, subsidised, traded and all round abused by the cabal of dodgy pols and venal corporates after a quick target-tick and/or short-term £reebie that are the problem.
So I can see all that changing right away. Not.
Gizmag - Carbon Capture: a bridging technology too far?
Guardian - Wicks: All is lost on global warming without clean coal - Feeling secure, are we?
Times - How carbon capture and storage (CCS) could make coal the fuel of the future - Ah, 'could' it?
Greenbang - Is carbon storage really all good? -
FT - EU split on carbon capture intensifies
Guardian - Live Q&A: George Monbiot on clean coal - While I might query the 'leading green commentator' bit, it's a debate, and may be worth following.
FT - The carbon-capture challenge
FT - NEW - Carbon capture and storage in very, very expensive shock
Information
Articles
The Register - Brown gov will make 'big commitment' to carbon capture - Big as in small - Nowt like backing a winner!
Greenbang - Carbon capture as much use a chocolate teapot: Greenpeace - Bless
Guardian - Can technology save the climate?
Indy - UK's climate change plans incoherent, says scientist - Oi, Gordon, I think a tabloid has another plastic bag opp for you to devote your energies to.
Greenbang - Think tank gives roadmap for carbon capture in the UK - So the technology is sound...phew. It's just how it gets specified, used, subsidised, traded and all round abused by the cabal of dodgy pols and venal corporates after a quick target-tick and/or short-term £reebie that are the problem.
So I can see all that changing right away. Not.
Gizmag - Carbon Capture: a bridging technology too far?
Guardian - Wicks: All is lost on global warming without clean coal - Feeling secure, are we?
Times - How carbon capture and storage (CCS) could make coal the fuel of the future - Ah, 'could' it?
Greenbang - Is carbon storage really all good? -
FT - EU split on carbon capture intensifies
Guardian - Live Q&A: George Monbiot on clean coal - While I might query the 'leading green commentator' bit, it's a debate, and may be worth following.
FT - The carbon-capture challenge
FT - NEW - Carbon capture and storage in very, very expensive shock
Information
A new day, a new website
Waste
I'll share it, despite it still seeming to think Freecycle is the only swap site in town and Direct.gov knowing all about (and kindly promoting if not in the best section) reuse and Junkk.com's role for years. Lord knows how much will be ploughed into 'promoting' this one.
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs - E&EO
WE NEED TO RETHINK THE THREE R’S – BENN LAUNCHES NEW WASTE CAMPAIGN
We are all being urged to rethink our approach to waste, in a new campaign launched by Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) today.
The new campaign, part of the Government’s Act On CO2 campaign, looks at everything from food waste to furniture recycling and encourages consumers to ‘Remember. Reduce. Reuse. Recycle.’
A new website offering tips and advice to consumers on making better use of the things we all too often put straight in the bin or take to the dump, also launches today at www.direct.gov.uk/waste.
Research published recently by Defra showed that an additional 500,000 tonnes of household waste could be saved from landfill by doing more to reuse it or find another home for it. And if every household in the EU recycled one electrical or electronic item such as a mobile phone or iPod, 73,000 tonnes could be diverted from landfill – the same as 9,500 round the world flights.
Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said:
“I set out recently what the Government will do to help the country on its path to becoming a zero waste nation. Making better use of everything around us will really help us to tackle the impact our waste has on climate change, and save us money too. That’s why our campaign is encouraging everyone to rethink what they might think of as ‘waste’ and ‘recycling’ – we can all do things like put our old sofa on Freecycle rather than taking it to the dump, or recycle our old mobile if we get a new one.”
I'll share it, despite it still seeming to think Freecycle is the only swap site in town and Direct.gov knowing all about (and kindly promoting if not in the best section) reuse and Junkk.com's role for years. Lord knows how much will be ploughed into 'promoting' this one.
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs - E&EO
WE NEED TO RETHINK THE THREE R’S – BENN LAUNCHES NEW WASTE CAMPAIGN
We are all being urged to rethink our approach to waste, in a new campaign launched by Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) today.
The new campaign, part of the Government’s Act On CO2 campaign, looks at everything from food waste to furniture recycling and encourages consumers to ‘Remember. Reduce. Reuse. Recycle.’
A new website offering tips and advice to consumers on making better use of the things we all too often put straight in the bin or take to the dump, also launches today at www.direct.gov.uk/waste.
Research published recently by Defra showed that an additional 500,000 tonnes of household waste could be saved from landfill by doing more to reuse it or find another home for it. And if every household in the EU recycled one electrical or electronic item such as a mobile phone or iPod, 73,000 tonnes could be diverted from landfill – the same as 9,500 round the world flights.
Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said:
“I set out recently what the Government will do to help the country on its path to becoming a zero waste nation. Making better use of everything around us will really help us to tackle the impact our waste has on climate change, and save us money too. That’s why our campaign is encouraging everyone to rethink what they might think of as ‘waste’ and ‘recycling’ – we can all do things like put our old sofa on Freecycle rather than taking it to the dump, or recycle our old mobile if we get a new one.”
Thursday, October 29, 2009
\:( - RIP?
Waste industry speaks out about WRAP 'super body' plans - UPDATE 2 this
On the one hand I have been an advocate of amortisation to reduce the rampant waste through overlapping quangos. So... cautious welcome.
One the other... the lead is....WRAP???????
And what is it about 'superbodies' that gets my eyebrow cranking (new icon in headline) big time?
These are the guys that demanded my business plan, told us 'reuse was not of interest', and then copied a ton of stuff we had done, were doing, are doing and will do using no public money on driving 'not for profit' board member bonusses up in pretty darn near conflict of interest ways via box-ticking, target-meeting 'awareness' campaigns.
The outfit that figured giving huge amounts to vastly-profitable international companies to help them make more money on their packaging was a good deal.
Enough on the various interest groups surrounding this huge industry speaking out; what about the public and consumers being required to plough millions into all this with near zero say or representation?
On the one hand I have been an advocate of amortisation to reduce the rampant waste through overlapping quangos. So... cautious welcome.
One the other... the lead is....WRAP???????
And what is it about 'superbodies' that gets my eyebrow cranking (new icon in headline) big time?
These are the guys that demanded my business plan, told us 'reuse was not of interest', and then copied a ton of stuff we had done, were doing, are doing and will do using no public money on driving 'not for profit' board member bonusses up in pretty darn near conflict of interest ways via box-ticking, target-meeting 'awareness' campaigns.
The outfit that figured giving huge amounts to vastly-profitable international companies to help them make more money on their packaging was a good deal.
Enough on the various interest groups surrounding this huge industry speaking out; what about the public and consumers being required to plough millions into all this with near zero say or representation?
Can't hurt to revisit
Simple, painless steps cut carbon and save money, a new study shows
And such as here great places to do it.
Not via endless multi-million £ 'awareness' box-ticking campaigns from overlapping quangos with too much of our money for the sense they possess.
And such as here great places to do it.
Not via endless multi-million £ 'awareness' box-ticking campaigns from overlapping quangos with too much of our money for the sense they possess.
POOH CORNER - Whiff-fi
OK, it's not quite 'pooh', but related enough:
The methane makers
And interesting.
Especially, in these recessionary times, how the chart matches our family meat purchase trends, though we have drawn the line at cannibalism. For now.
The methane makers
And interesting.
Especially, in these recessionary times, how the chart matches our family meat purchase trends, though we have drawn the line at cannibalism. For now.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
According to Plan?
Suitably 'inspired', I go off message...
Hey, what's the worst that could happen? They've ignored all my efforts at trying to engage thus far.
Marks & Spencer describes its journey from corporate social responsibility to sustainability
I'd like to think many brands/retailers are committing to environmentally sound initiatives and practices for more than pure bottom line as opposed to more laudable triple bottom line reasons. But the realities are few and far between.
Sadly, from personal experience, I have found too many managers (at least at mid, gatekeeper level) exist solely on what makes a margin. The talk from on high may be there, but the walkers lower down ain't hearing... or, frankly, being encouraged much.
And the retail world especially seems to make the Russian military look like a Woodstock reunion: the climate of fear at every level is palpable, from worrying about what might not make money to wondering if they guy above will get miffed at not having had a good idea.
The odd thing is that it IS possible to make green not just for the planet, but also your consumers AND yourselves.
Just stop thinking like buzz-word marketers and start empathising as human beings with shared values.
Marks & Spencer creates 'virtual patchwork quilt' for Copenhagen Climate Summit drive - Looking for tangibles... finding few. I imagine the presentation of the patch will attract a fair bit of PR come the day, mind.
Hey, what's the worst that could happen? They've ignored all my efforts at trying to engage thus far.
Marks & Spencer describes its journey from corporate social responsibility to sustainability
I'd like to think many brands/retailers are committing to environmentally sound initiatives and practices for more than pure bottom line as opposed to more laudable triple bottom line reasons. But the realities are few and far between.
Sadly, from personal experience, I have found too many managers (at least at mid, gatekeeper level) exist solely on what makes a margin. The talk from on high may be there, but the walkers lower down ain't hearing... or, frankly, being encouraged much.
And the retail world especially seems to make the Russian military look like a Woodstock reunion: the climate of fear at every level is palpable, from worrying about what might not make money to wondering if they guy above will get miffed at not having had a good idea.
The odd thing is that it IS possible to make green not just for the planet, but also your consumers AND yourselves.
Just stop thinking like buzz-word marketers and start empathising as human beings with shared values.
Marks & Spencer creates 'virtual patchwork quilt' for Copenhagen Climate Summit drive - Looking for tangibles... finding few. I imagine the presentation of the patch will attract a fair bit of PR come the day, mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)