Bottom of the class

Anyone who knows us, what we do, how long we've been going, and who we have done (or tried to do) business with may find this interesting.

Nice to see public money supporting another 'non-profit' organisation with some ad branding, as opposed to little old free us, with our terrible 'commercial' stigma

We're getting noticed... and published!

Just put down the phone to a Daily Express reporter (Very nice. I hope she stays that way about me/us in print) following my 'Bin Loading' blog.





And the mail has just arrived with a very nice Green Guide for Christmas, which I'll hopefully be reviewing very soon.

Great. More money where it's really needed.

Another one to which it will be interesting to see if my reply gets posted: London launches recycling push in supermarkets

"Cool. Encouragement is to be applauded over the recent high-profile spate of threats and (mostly?) failed attempts at convictions.

The film (which I had never heard of until now - so thanks for that) sounds like a true heir to the Wombles and Clangers.

I would point out that this is more about reuse, and there are many worthy complements to recycling in this and the related sphere or repair, which deserve equal support, though their target-meeting, box-ticking potential is less attractive to some funders.

Learn more via a nifty exhibition on having fun with environmental initiatives, by visiting ‘Dreaming of a Green Christmas' at the Science Museum on Dec. 6: http://www.junkk.com/newsarticle.asp?slevel=0z608&parent_id=608&renleewtsapf=286

We look forward to greeting such as Mr. Barlow there, and sharing how doing their bit for the environment can also benefit local taxpayers in their own homes.

And considering the online resource I'm posting this in, we are also keen to show a few marketers how they can turn green into gold, and their primary producer responsibilities into great enviro-pportunities, too."

Bin Loading - the new terrorism?

This made my blood boil: £100 fine if you dump food in the wrong bin

So I wrote:

"Bin there, done that, got the ASBO

Have you been a victim of Britain’s bin bureaucracy? If you have contact us on
0871 520 2982 or email news.desk@express.co.uk

Forgive me writing slightly off question, but as the "Have your say' section didn't seem to have a topic for this yet I hope you'll understand.

As a committed believer in not wasting anything (one look at the site signature will show you by how much), I am totally in support of anything to encourage recycling (though it’s a shame that householders not being acknowledged better for their unpaid labour role as daily sorters). Reuse & repair is even better, but the box-tickers don't seem to like that as much as it can't be measured as easily to claim a met target).

Such extreme methods of enforcement can only lead to a total backlash, and result in an even worse environmental situation... and possibly civic disobedience.

We are talking fines, and possible criminal records, for 'offences' that are pretty minor anyway, but for which people might not have committed. Where is the burden of proof going to be? Who is paying for all these new officials (and their qualifications are...?), not to mention the lawyers and court time for the inevitable appeal and case dismissal. So far they forces of Bin Loading have scored how many convictions? At least the courts still have some sense of justice, sometimes.

We need to get people to want to do the right thing: being their mates, helping and advising. Not by nannying, not by threatening... but by incentivising and rewarding. Show the ones that do will that they are appreciated and others will follow. Ignore the small minority and concentrate on the majority. This country is getting obsessed by fines first, workable procedures (to actually avoid the fines) second. Our authorities are almost running a protection racket: "Shame if this Tesco carrier ended up in your paper wheelie squire... whoops.. look at that. That'll be a pony or you're nicked"

Come to the Science Museum next month to see how much fun we can have... whilst saving."

Sorry (again, all round), the guy's a genius

Dodging a bullet

This story in the Telegraph caught my eye: Cheap bullets put lives of paratroopers at risk

I've pretty much given up on not being 'moderated' by their blog pages, so I wrote a letter:

Should the story about the low-cost, defective ammo supplied to our troops prove as shocking as reported, may I suggest as a way of establishing who is responsible and punishing them via a modern-day version of an ancient practice: a witch hunt. We release all involved into the woods and let our fine armed forces pursue them, armed with the ammunition in question. If there is no problem, then their innocence (post mortem) will be established. If however they survive, guilt will be clear and they can be suitably promoted sideways with full pension and benefits. Why is we reward officials only for saving money as opposed to getting best value to do a job right? I'm still waiting to find out who thought not making Navy warships (Sheffield/Falklands) fireproof was a good idea.

Actually, and having sent it, there seem to be two extremes. Penny-pinching to an unsafe degree. Or spending waaaay over the odds (in the case of anything environmental - consultants, research, contractors, etc). Something to do with villas being free for compliant signatories perhaps? Whichever way, those who have the power seem to see careers and benefits develop nicely no matter what.

It's (Not All) A Gas, Gas, Gas

Good news, in that it is 25 times more, er, bad a greenhouse gas: Global methane rise slowing down

Green Corner. Black Corner.

Being one of the Top Gear Triumverate, and adapt as all heck with a cunning phrase, James May is a power that be with a broad demographic (Sun Readers, and those who just look at he pictures when their jacuzzi installer is on her break). So this is worth a read: As seen on TV: phoney environmentalists are taking us for a ride

Though a LED torch against a searchlight, I reckon so's this (if they publish, the Telegraph have a JunkkMale filter lately):

"For a start, like some, I’m not quite sure what an environmentalist is, phony or not. Like usual, we seem to have to fall into a Bush-esque ‘You’re either for us or against us’ camp. It’s hard to be truly green if you’re only black or white.
I had a look at a few definitions and didn’t much fancy any of them. All I know is I have a crumbling pile, live nowhere near any useful commuter transportation, have 2.2 kids, in-laws in Singapore, spend more than I make and have demands on my money and time the like of which civil wars used to be fought over (Now, being self-employed, it’s just quietly sorted by civil servants from me... to them). So between that and whatever it is that counts as hating waste and being more than a little concerned about how what we do now impacts later on, I fall into a middle ground: neither ‘mentalist nor climate denier (which is what I see bandied about a lot by folk who tend to oppose notions like, well, some of yours).
I know some right wing folk who do care about all sorts of green stuff, and live the life. I know a lot of left-leaners who hate 4x4s but don’t think Evian and skiing in Klosters is the same thing. I certainly know a few who are, I think still within your definition, sacrificing for the future’s sake. One can only applaud them now, while history will be the judge of those who didn’t feel so disposed.
Can’t fault the population comment: Finite space to stand on. Reducing areas on which to stand and grow stuff. End point = the political dilemma that dare not speak its un-PC name. I certainly ain’t going there. So we turn to ‘bailing with a leaky bucket’ approach.
Good on you for the recycling thing. It’s really a no-brainer, if done right, ignoring we are turned into unpaid (though fined for poor workpersonship) sorters for target setters and high paid meeters of same.
Reuse is a tad different, and sadly low on the ‘grand scheme’ scale, especially to the box tickers, but actually that’s where a lot of good can come inspiring people at home. Especially kids. Check out our site (link in name) to see what is being planned at the Science Museum next month. Not a spam tin in site. Though, now you mention it...
Reduction is big and pretty relevant. So why, on God’s little Earth, would it still seem sensible to leave a TV on standby all night, using energy and creating pollution, if it wasn’t necessary? I can see how lifting one’s finger all the way over the barn conversion is a drag, and when you have multi-media income streams to fund the consequences £-wise, why bother? But really... c’mon.
With you on the nuclear thing (along with Prof. Lovelock, so that’s Gaia on board too), except for the ‘if.. make it safe’ bit. Remember Space 1999? But at least we’ll get to meet all sorts of alien mutants. Just hope they don't turn out to be from Sellafield. As you say, don’t see a credible option yet, so fingers (currently five per hand) crossed!

Big up on the Hydrogen ra-ra, too, but I just hope we’re are spared pols and celebs (and motoring journos) extolling its benefits, with a diesel truck of refills trailing out of shot behind, when the rest of us can’t get a shot of water vapour (it is a greenhouse 'gas', too I believe) out the pipe for decades. Maybe I’ll keep the R-reg (ta for the OK) and ride out the LPG, Hybrid and biodiesel waves until the next big thing arrives.

Finally, discussing is of course fine, but a little bit of doing at some stage can’t hurt either. Especially when some options can save a lot of whatever it is (time, money, planet) we each hold dear."

A folly of Olympic proportions

Well, here's a surprise - Cost of London Olympics UP £900M.

When I owned my agency (I think this is my equivalent of 'When I were a lad..' and has been used before, so bear with me), we were held to our estimates (we tried, valiantly, to point out that a quotation was not possible on something not yet finished) to within the penny, and second. But 40% in a year?

Actually with Junkk.com, it has not been not too different. Funding well thought through applications that do not have every unpredictable 't' crossed and 'i' dotted fail, while those that are masterpieces of fiction, which fit into the system's expectations and aspirations, sail through.

What ever happened to 'promise low and delight by delivering high?' The beancounters have bankrupted the asylum.

Look at Wembley. Now the Olympics.

You pay peanuts; you get monkeys. You quott low, you get the job... you then come out with the most astounding tripe to describe a businesss plan I have ever heard.

Now as I don't play the lottery and don't live in London it really shouldn't matter much to me one way or 'tother, but should I find one penny of my money is going to supp

Indy
Guardian

You know what sucks?

He does: Dyson in call for ‘truth in advertising’ law

Thouigh to this - "Dyson also denied widespread claims that he is “anti-advertising and anti-ad agencies”. But he did say that too many marketing, PR and advertising campaigns are "misinformed or oversell" - I have to say that as the person tasked with the job of conveying the message, the information or oversell was not really down to me to provide or approve.

Bumpy ride

The airlines must be desperate, if this is the best they can do: Stop this fear of flying; it's one of the greenest ways to travel. I must find out what you need to do to get to post such drivel as a piece and not a blog:

"Waaaay-hay!. When I saw this mother of a headline I knew we were in for a bumpy ride!

A few score land or sea-based wrongs do not make an airborne right. Whatever % it is or isn’t, if we concede that global warming is not helped by emissions, anything that contributes to the current rate, much less the increase in it... cannot be a good thing.

What people want to do is one thing. What they can is another. And what they should another still. And what they will be able to, one day...

So I may be able to live with the supermarket looking a lot different without fresh fruit or flowers (local points taken and showing this to be a red herring). In any case, my muesli goes great with dried apricots (please tell me they can be shipped!)

Great that ailrines are doing everything from making spoons lighter, to optimising the amount of water in toilets. Not so sure about the kilos of Sunday classifieds or duty frees, but OK. And Virgin turning the A380 into a gin palace doesn’t sound the best passener/Co2 emission ratio way of travelling either. Remind me, how much more space did they taunt BA with for their front/upper deck folks floor area? At least the Asian airlines are talking cramming 800 in. Then again, there is probably a weight/volume optimum too. Best to use a private jet, doubtless as advertised or via a press junket press-release op-ed rehash in many a quality Sunday.

And careful of the 'solar panel is the solution' thing. I’m still trying to assess who, and what, is right right: http://junkk.blogspot.com/2006/11/numb3rs.html

I’d say the only pretty safe course is that advocated by Richie Remote, ‘til they prove that offshore wind farms cost more environmentally to build and run and distribute the juice than they save."

Numb3rs

It's a cop show on SKY (my mates). Quite fun, and has made my kids a bit more interested in the power of maths, as opposed to statistics, which is anything you want it to be.

And what I have read here - Solar panels won't save the planet - seem to be matters of mathematical fact, and hence environmental (beyond the financial option) value:

"... a rather more general question-mark has been raised over their value by one of the country's genuine experts, Abu Bakr Bahaj, a senior lecturer in civil engineering, who based his figures on the experience of a large panel installation at his university in Southampton.

Since solar panels in Britain generate, on average, only 20 per cent of their potential maximum output (at a cost of £4,500 per kilowatt of installed capacity), he reported in the journal of the Institute of Civil Engineers that the average pay-back time of solar panels is more than 45 years (although 70 years, he wrote, "is a more realistic figure"). Yet the average life of a photovoltaic cell is only 25 years."

I have written to the quoted sources to see if this can be confirmed and turned into something that the public can use to assess actual £ & e-values to help their decision processes.

I'll let you know if they come back.

It's funny, 'cos it's true

Bah, humbug! It's the annual Christmas card debate...*

* For our part, there will be the usual scrambel to make something reused, then figure the impact of ther posting, and decide, too late, to do a nifty original e-mailing.

So figure on a copied snowball about the 24th!

Reality (Sound) Bites.

This today from our Shadow Chancellor: Where Stelzer's wrong on Tory policy

Seemed a bit low on substance to me. My reply (if it gets published, I seem to be 'moderated' a lot on the Telegraph a lot):

"Nothing that is green is ever going to be black or white, so while it is snappy and a good starting point, I hope we are going to see something more sophisticated built, and adequately explained, around ‘pay as you burn’. And on an individual, non-corporate level, I’d certainly like to sense there is a recognition that not everyone lives in inner London.

No one said it would be easy, but a way has to be found to navigate solutions which achieve the desired effect: reduced emissions and waste. The latter is just common, and economic good sense, and it amazes us at our reuse website that much more is not being done simply out of self-interest. But in the case of the former it will not be acceptable to just shift things around financially (so most initiatives involving the word ‘trading’ make me shudder) whilst achieving no net reductions. Nor will it if we simply end up penalizing those left with few choices to make, or who cannot not benefit from trying to reduce their environmental impacts.

A person who drives pollutes. You don’t need a car in (most) cities. But what about those in the country? I can’t believe that those clogging the motorways daily actually opt to do so.

Equally we seem to have plans (the government’s, in this case, so it is an example only), to rate houses according to their eco-efficiency. Great for a ODPM new build on a South Eastern flood plain; not so good for a cottage built (many years ago, and whose carbon cost is now well passed) in the country. Who votes most, benefits most?

Usage-based penalties, fees, rates, price hikes and taxes are certainly part of the package, but I am not so sure whether a lot of us will see the compensation (in taxes, etc) elsewhere, if we register them at all. To gain support, the transparency of such actions is therefore paramount. If I pay more for fuel, I want to see transport infrastructure (not road-based) improve - fancy popping back the train line though Ross on Wye? – so I don’t have to use the car.

And if we are going to incentivise beneficial initiatives, please let them actually have an environmental benefit - after initial enthusiasm and support, these pages of late make me more than unsure that a hybrid or wind turbine is either financially OR environmentally a good choice, no matter where I live."

Auto - What's the other one?

Scoop two unique test-drives of environmentally friendly vehicles

"Remind me. Is this the one that I read about recently that all the green-pols and celebs are queuing up to ‘endorse’ (way cooler than a Prius); the one that will need a truck to follow it to fill up?
I love Hydrogen. All that comes out the pipe is water ‘n all (though I gather that water vapour is a greenhouse ‘gas’).
And anything that investigates this potential is a great thing (and how this piece was written). But.....
I implore any and all, from gushing ‘It’s electric... there’s no pollution. The electronic juice is made by magic’ TV anchors, ‘Look at me, I care’ rock stars and ‘I’m serious about this Green thing’ pols to not let us think that it is ANYWHERE NEAR an alternative for the common, driving person, yet. And let’s not forget the enviro cost of making a new car, too.
I am still trying to figure out whether buying a wind turbine is a daft financially and will only hasten my grandkids’ suntans.

Nice bike, though."

What we say. What we do.

Don't want to steal their thunder, but this from reuters (if you can find it) is interesting.

I did it. And so have a fair few others, around the world.

What stuck me was how consistent the results were. High 80's yes. Pretty much around the globe.

Now I've told you what I think, what can we do, Mr. Media?

Rubbish - How to save the planet - your starter for 1

It - It's a rubbish tax – and it won't work allowed comments!:

"Who, for instance, is going to tell whether all the rubbish in your bin is in fact yours, or has been dumped in your bin by your tax-avoiding neighbour?"

Good question. But I believe that this has already been answered - detection to fine and criminal conviction, though I'm not aware if there was any trial, burden of proof or anything. Until the appeal. It's done by 'officers', though I'm also not too terribly sure what their training, qualifications or levels of oversight are either. Bet they’re on a bonus, too, which means lobbing a nasty in the local beat bins will be a nice little earner for the cousin-in-law.

The law seems to have the same view, so thus far we have a ton more civil servants (salary, pension, redundancy or sidelining costs and stress-compo inc.), a few squillion more the legal profession (on whose tab?) and the net benefit to the global environment is.... please tell me.

And how many times does it have to be pointed out that it is the bigger picture that is vital at all times. Tokenistic target-meeting in a city (Ken, please note) isn't much good if it is shunted off to China, where they'll probably burn it and the CO2 will waft globally anyway.

Reduction is getting some major attention but is usually in heavy duty areas (ie: energy production) over the heads of most consumers. Well, me at least. I’m still trying to figure out whether buying a Prius or home wind turbine will bankrupt me and/or actually speed my grandkids’ demise.

Re:use and re:pair are much more re:warding to the individual, but most of the effort relevant to the re:areas as far as the public is concerned is causing grief. And with the best will in the world, recycling, while great, is not that tangibly rewarding in the home situation.

Make an Xmas trip to the Science Museum to see what else we can do to motivate folk by being on their side for a change, not shrill shrews, scolds or nannies:

http://www.danacentre.org.uk/events/2006/12/06/206

Air - What goes up.. probably has a down side

'Nightmare' expansion of British airports predicted

And I quote: "It is now time for those politicians who claim to have so-called green credentials to either put up or shut up.

"We accept that the UK economy and its people have much to gain from a successful aviation industry. But there is universal recognition that the aviation industry is one of the fastest growing contributors to global warming."

Booker Prizes - Recycling & Solar

Thre's an interesting commentator I have missed until now, which is a pity. He's called Christopher Booker (and chums), and he/they write(s) in the Sunday Telegraph. From his archive he's a bit of a scourge of 'Less than sensible' e-initiatives.

It's a rubbish tax – and it won't work

How does 'recycling' end up here?

Solar panels won't save the planet

A rich seam. I look forward to engaging with him/them.

Will It, er, work?

ITER - NUCLEAR FUSION PROJECT - The answer is... I hope so!

Telegraph.
Indy.