The first climate change refugees

We mentioned Tuvalu and the Torres Straits islands quite a while back as they appeared to be potentially the first islands to be evacuated because of rising sea levels and tidal surges. It looks as if they will now be second or third after one of the Carteret Islands, which are a low level island group making up part of Papua New Guinea.

This report from the Daily Mail highlights the problems that the Carteret Islands have suffered over recent years from tidal surges, and on how the first refugees from one of the islands are having to relocate because of the rising sea levels.

"The fruit trees that carried mango, banana, breadfruit and paw-paw are all dead from the sea water that has killed their roots and the children survive on a diet of just coconuts and fish. The roots of their black hair turn yellow, signifying malnutrition."

"Grass-roofed huts have been washed away by the tidal surges and families have been forced to move further inland to higher ground, away from the beaches where, in decades past, fishing nets were hung out to dry from waterside homes."

I rather suspect that the small group having to relocate will prove to be the first of an ever increasing number over the coming decades.

You can't write com... tragedy this go... er...

Just watched the BBC lunchtime news,

Seems there is a week long series on green food.

Second up was a piece on growing tomatoes locally, using a £40m greenhouse heated by the waste heat from a nearby factory. No real details, but hard to fault.

But first, the cherry on the cake (hold that thought).

It was about Chilean cherries. You can see where this is going, well, coming from, I'm sure.

Actually quite balanced in many ways, including frequent reference to the fact that this trade means jobs in Chile (hold that job thought, too).

Had a guy from the Soil Association explaining the consequences of it all, but he did also concede that 'we' need to cut back, and perhaps only have the odd cherry as a luxury. Now, how a business can exist and be sustained on that I don't know. Which has troubled me as a matter of economic fact when we do fancy such as a 4x4 or bottled water. You need a constant, reliable market to ensure supply, surely?

Anyway, to the nub.

To put all this in full context, the BBC reporter flew to Chile. Now, one could argue that this was just his job (held those thoughts?), was just this once or whatever, but for the added value of him saying what he said from under a cherry tree... how does this play?

No, really.

SITE - HOME PRINTED XMAS CARDS

This started as a link for a simple Xmas-related site: dltk-cards.com

Of course nothing in matters green can ever be that simple.

Because having initially though 'neato, a way to do stuff at hoe last minute', I began to ponder consequences. As you do.

I ended up still in favour, having borne a few things in mind.

This family wraps prezzies in newspaper. It last a nanosecond once the opening bell is rung, and no one gives a monkeys for it under the tree or once discarded. It is useful to help light the fire (we unplug the fireplace and switch off the central heating).

Trouble is, it's hard to see who gets what. A label is useful..

Labels cost money, need to be made and printed and then got to the house from a shop.

Hence, and so long as they are printed on the back of other paper, and the most is made of the page coverage, I am prepared to live with the PC and ink commitment.

Hope that adds up.

I'm sure you can suggest a few, too

TOP TEN GREENWASH CAMPAIGNS OF 2007

Dividing Fools

Now it has been established that everything dark (as in side) green is the fault of the US, I'll be keen to see how things closer to home now get laid elsewhere: Europe divided over targets for cutting car CO2 emissions

I do of course note my favourite word in there: targets.

In the morasses (is that the plural?)that were/are Kyoto and/or Bali, I was starting to sense that aspects of the US environmental position (as distinct from their economic one, which is a very different kettle of tariffs. Though even here it seemed 'optimistic' to expect a dominant economy to hobble itself in comparison to not only business competitors, but military ones as well. You can't build tanks on the cheap unless you are cranking up a weekly coal-fired power station and steel mill) were worth pondering.

For instance, I would have loved more in-depth and agenda-free analysis of their claims that in real terms they had actually achieved cuts whilst the EU had trumpeted setting a bunch of targets that they then had promptly failed to meet (see above, and the UK's awesome record to date).

I know which I prefer on my enviROi basis.

ADDENDUM- The Curse of the Common Moniker

Wading through this I was a bit surprised to see a quote attributed to me that I had not written in yesterday's HYS. Only it wasn't me. Just another with my name. Thank heavens that, in amongst a ton of off-topic, personal-flaming that now scars such forums, this guy was relatively rational. Though what he wrote was not what I did.

Letters - I include this merely because it does offer and interesting spread of views. One that I did appreciate was the point that to make their point on emissions of carbon the Indy chose an image of cooling towers, which only release steam. Which is, of course, a green house 'gas', though one would have preferred them to have made the distinction.

Bali Hype?

Further to the kick-off last week, I thought I'd start here: Key climate summit opens in Bali

I'm sure there'll be more (posts, that is. And, thinking on it, summits, too).

I hadn't appreciated this thing went on for almost 2 weeks!

Update 1:

Reuters - "Naughty" nations in a coal lot of trouble in Bali - Hard to imagine this is the first I have come across. And I am not sure this tactic will work too well.

Reuters - Indonesia plants trees to offset Bali emissions - Better than nothing, I guess, but how about not cutting down millions of acres of mature ones? Just a thought. Party on, doods.

Update 2:

Indy - Diplomats warned that climate change is security issue, not a green dilemma - Waking up to...?????! Guess that's why they get the big bucks.

Guardian - High hopes for Bali - Altogether now: 'Everyone's got high hopes, they got...' I wonder how he's finding it there? Still, he has had but three replies to date, and one was a duplicate. So maybe they are in the minority.

Update 3:

The Economist - Getting serious in Bali - '..expectations for Bali are low, and were being managed downwards before the meeting..' At least a few tens of thousands of folk had a nice break, though. Seriously.

Update 4:

Times - Americans 'must change their lifestyle' for the sake of planet - Just the Yanks? Phew! For a minute I thought we might all need to pull together. This will really get them onside.

Times - Atheists, agnostics and religious leaders are as one in their belief in the need to save the world from Man, they say in a joint statement. Which was nice.

Indy - Demonstrations across the globe mark Bali summit - at least they got a nice day for it. No, really. But stuff like this... "We're doing this in solidarity with the women around the world who are already suffering the effects of climate chaos" do make me sigh. I have zero in common with this mindset.

Latest Update 5:

Guardian - US balks at Bali carbon targets - One has to wonder what would be 'helpful' in this day and age. That said, there is a slight sense that the US is getting dumped with the role of saying no on behalf of a few less honest brokers, too.

Guardian - Q&A: Bali climate change conference

Guardian - Bali diary - Not exactly a great bit of journalsitic input, really.

'For all I have got out of this circus so far by way of information and/or insights and/or inspiration, and suspect I will get out of it as the consequence of a collection of 'all the talents' in global statespersonship lobbing up for the last few days of several, I ain't holding my breath.

But, as you say, it has to be held somewhere. So it may as well be lush. Hope it was worth the trip.'

Latest Update 6:

Gaurdian - UN calls for (my italics) 40 per cent cut in emissions by rich countries - equal billing to a 'it's for the penguins' plea. Let's see which one works.

BBC - Editors Blog - Environmental briefing

BBC - Key climate summit opens in Bali

Latest Update 7:

BBC - Tackling climate change - Bali summit - This link came from, it's fair to say, a less than climate supportive blog. Thing is, I have to say that certain aspects were a real gift to them:

'Matthew Price went to Boston'
'Nick Higham met them'
'Roger Harrabin went to the United Arab Emirates to meet...'
'Sanjoy Majumder visited Pawan and Sangeeta Kamra at their home in south Delhi.'
'Quentin Sommerville went to meet them.'

You can imagine what the obvious question was. On top of this, I simply wonder if this investment in time, money and energy got beyond being tucked away in the back of the BBC website to have any real value at all. Beyond the quality of the reports, that is.

I do despair. Hope Rog enjoyed the UAE en route to/from Bali. But, of course, he has to do this as it's his job.

Gaurdian - UN chief: World 'must act now' on climate change

Guardian - Progress at Bali

Indy - Bali conference close to deal on saving forests

Times - Act now on climate change or face oblivion, warns UN chief - say it often enough, and...

Times - Carbon stand-off puts climate talks at risk

Latest Update 8:

Reuters - EU-U.S. climate impasse in Bali easing - Encouraging headline, at least!

Guardian - US proposal threatens climate change deal - then again...

Sometime later, a last minute flurry resulted in... something.

BBC - Climate deal sealed by US U-turn - I'm never quite sure in the new media speak, but in a negotiation I'd have thought conceding a point to get closer to agreement was heading towards a compromise; not a U-turn. In fact one can see how these days, when faced by such an 'interpretation' by the media, some may feel the need to dig in to avoid such an accusation.

Latest Update 9:

Well it's all over, bar the shouting. And there has been a lot. At least in the papers I have read. Depressingly, there seem to have been some very partisan positions immediately taken almost immediately. In many ways I see the process to have driven some further apart, though there is a glimmer that the result may have moved a smidge to something 'better'.

I am not sure I can be bothered to add the links to the various newspapers, as the takes they have, and the views on their blogs, pretty much fall into predictable areas. Maybe I'll wait 'til tomorrow and let the Sunday's do a summary and then drop it.

What I will say is I just watched Richard North on the BBC, now called 'environmental commentator' (whatever that actually means), in an exchange with Richard Simmons I think in the studio. And the views were to my now weary, cynical mind pretty balanced. My favourite was that the 'green lobby' isn't helping much and needs to be sidelined. That'll go down well in the corporate boardrooms of a few eco-activist charity/not-for-profits I'll be bound!

I would welcome more such pragmatic reporting and/or commentary in future. In fact, if I see it I may share it in favour of some from such as the Indy, Guardian or Daily Mail which now seem to have frankly little to do with the issues and more with the prejudices of the editorial staff and the readerships, all circling their wagons and just feeling cosy with their mates either lobbing out whatever they fancy that serves, or going for a group hug when one from the other side lands in their midst. The quality of debate has sure dropped to near zero, along with much chance of objective information sharing.

Postscript:

Yes, they're just from one paper (I'm not sure I saw much, if anything, from any others. Moving on), and one with a fairly entrenched standpoint, but I think these make fitting, if depressing postscripts to it all. I really doubt I will be moved to look for or share much else.

Guardian - US pours cold water on Bali optimism

Guardian - We've been suckered again by the US. So far the Bali deal is worse than Kyoto

Ah well, if nothing else, at least the rest of 'us' can blame the US. No fault anywhere else, from UK pols who say one thing and do another, to enviro-gurus whose job requires them to do what the rest of us must, in their terms, avoid.

Were it that easy.

Guardian - Road to nowhere? - So it was all worthwhile, then? Hmmn.

A tale of two entitities

Our media (well, one* of 'em): Britain's carbon strategy 'up in smoke'

Our government: (DEFRA) Success at Bali talks

What is a boy to think?

The best I can come up with is that talk is now so cheap, at least from almost any representative body we have acting , at least in theory, for the public interest, it is all less than worthless. It simply gets in the way.

* Addendum - as there was the opportunity, I was moved to reply.

I'm afraid to say the only 'strategy' I can discern from Mr. Brown is to say, or preferably have said by remote, whatever the next entity in line wants to hear, even if it is totally contradictory to the previous or subsequent statement. And simply assume that something 'out there' will stick, if repeated enough. When it comes to actually doing, or not, the hope then seems to be that by not being able to be pinned to anything the whole silly issue will go away. Not sure that's working too well here, or pretty much across any issue of high government.

As to 'relying' on 'more' renewable energy sources.... of course! But only if the enviROI works out. The minute I sense that this is all just a box-ticking, fine-avoiding, lobbyist-rewarding, interest-group-conceding exercise in making life easier on a political level now at the expense of my kids' futures, then the whole sorry lot will get the full force of my vote.

But I need credible, trustworthy numbers to make an assessment upon. Not a load of hype, spin, smoke and mirrors from the usual suspects of government, other pols, commerce and activists who inevitably pop up and are given voice by a less than challenging media, who are these days more interested in knee-jerk 'campaigns' and short-term, contention-driven ratings than balanced argument and/or objective reporting for the long term.

Rebuilding the stable door?

There was a piece on floods just now.

In it a pub was featured that had suffered £250k in damage, that had only just been put to rights.

Thing is, there was no mention of what preventative measures might have been put in place to help prevent a simple repetition of this process.

We have not yet been flooded here, and with luck will not be. But I am seriously looking at ways to allow for this possibility. Readers may recall an attempt I made at the time of the last floods to ask the authorities for guidance on how to avoid being a victim and claimant by simply protecting against it with suitable defences.

I still await any replies. Maybe compensation is deemed easier than cure?

The royal 'we'.

And 'we' are not amused.

I just watched a BBC Breakfast News piece about food, supermarkets and 'us'.

What a surprise; to debate this issue we were presented by representatives of two rather entrenched viewpoints - the FoE and the British Retailers Something - who proceeded to tell us what we were asking for and/or feeling.

The retail lady was indeed pretty much 'not us, guv', and they were only giving 'us' what 'we' demanded, which rather validated the point of the FoE lady that 'they' need to be forced to change... by government.

However, what really grated on me was this self-appointed guardian of 'me' constantly saying 'we must'. It really came across much too much as them being a slightly more equal we than others, and a group who see their agenda to be the only one and the rest of us must get in line, if for our own good, with them.

The net result of all this was, as always, a sense that I was caught between two extremes, neither of whom represented me at all, but who were invoking my mandate as if it were god-given, and given free rein by a media who only want a quick slot before moving on. A rather neat example of which was a subsequent piece where we were treated to the joys of having your own personal shopping assistant to help you buy such essentials as snow made from stuff you add water to. Nice.

ps: But it's OK, they have flown out to Africa to show us the great work Land Rover is doing to offset emissions. It really is washing all over me as just so much conflicting 'noise'.

Well served

The other day I suffered a little bit of collateral damage on a blog thread I was taking part in.

Me and my homies from the eco-hood were debating some matter of great e-mport, when in zapped a rather stinging rebuke from, I'd have to say, a slight climate optimist. Basically 'we' were are labelled a bunch of hyporcrites worrying about all this and what we can do when we are all doing so online via PCs. His premise was that these were much worse than anything else.

I have to say it gave me some pause, especially as an exponent of the cause of enviROI.

It also coincided with the latest press release from some 'green' IT company, promising me servers made of oak and offsetting my 'leccy by planting an Ethiopian.

So I tackled my ISP on this. And I think I'm good. Well... 'er'. He pointed out to me that the server they run, and which for Junkk.com is shared with 500 others, is rated at 75W. I won't do the maths here, but in the great scheme of things that doesn't seem too much.

But then there is of course the fact that the PC and monitor and peripherals (also ignoring the cost of making and getting 'em to me. At least reuse /recycling seems pretty well addressed) are humming away. And I am not, yet, on any green tariff, simply because I'm still sussing it all out and don't trust most yet.

Then, in final mitigation, there is the matter of practicality. To do what I do (assuming it's worthwhile... and frankly on a personal level it is actually not paying the rent yet) without my Mac and connection I'd need to be out and about pounding the motorways visiting folk. Or posting thousands of letters a day. And in nay case, my kids are pretty much expected to have a PC to do their work.

So, I hope, it's still enviROI+

Xmas WRAP party

As one who often looks to the human cost of various 'Planet Ban-it' campaigns, I take no pleasure from seeing folk lose jobs. Especially at this time of year. WRAP job losses expected in 25% funding cut as Defra budget pressures bite

As some will know, having not been very supported by WRAP to date, despite having an entity that would seem well in keeping with their remit, I have been on occasion a tad critical of how much has been spent and where... or on whom.

Sadly, I am less than reassured that the proposed budget cuts will improve matters, as it is now my experience that, especially within government and quango entities, the cuts are seldom where they should be (the causes of waste, losses or inefficiency) and more often than not in the few areas where some good does get done.

One rather wonders who got employed and on what contract now, that they will need to be unemployed and on what terms soon. Hardly seems very joined up or the best use of public funds.

Also, for a 'not for profit' company, it will be interesting to see how many of the rather extensive bonus-blessed board of all the talents bear the brunt of these cuts.

But I do note that this still means that WRAP’s budget will be about £55-60m.

Perhaps a few less campaigns to raise 'awareness' that is directly connected to bonus targets, and a bit more to actual doing stuff, and paying folk just to do a good job, may be in order?

Call for funding for Hydrogen research

This report from Engineering Talk details how a leading transport expert is calling for significant government investment into research to make Hydrogen a realistic fuel of the future.

"Prof Smith ......... believes hydrogen is one of the best fuel alternatives for the future, but said a significant Government investment is needed now to overcome technical and cost difficulties in sourcing, storing and transporting hydrogen."

Interesting little comment on the Northern Rock support too - "If the Government spent GBP 10 billion - only a third of what they spent on Northern Rock - we could build a high speed railway from London to Birmingham, reducing the need for domestic flights and long-distance car travel."

Now we will have to wait and see whether our gov's plan to surround the UK with offshore wind farms is going to eat all available funds to the exclusion of everything else. However, perhaps we may already have an indication of where the extra revenue to fund such projects may come from?

Quick Question

Dutch plant idea of Tulip Island

I have a picture that I may upload, but the concept is pretty clear.

Thing is, while I can see how it can relieve pressure on overcrowded cities, how does and island protect the coastline from rising sea levels? Some storm surge effects maybe, but 'levels' will just find a way round, surely.

Also, other than a pretty satellite picture, what possible benefit does this design confer?

'Arctic is screaming'

From Fox News.

"The Arctic is often cited as the canary in the coal mine for climate warming...........Now as a sign of climate warming, the canary has died. It is time to start getting out of the coal mines."

All very depressing, but a major signal to those on their jolly in Bali. Let's hope they take some notice.

I'll save us even if I have to cripple you you to do it

Darling fights back with promise to be a champion of the environment

Interesting headline. However, if the methodology is simply '...by announcing higher green taxes in his first Budget next spring', forgive my eyebrow arch.

Especially as all else I garner from this piece is that Mr Darling will say: "We must live within our new carbon budgets for the health of the wider world; and play our role in avoiding the threat of catastrophic climate change."

It's Xmas, hence one the other one has been pulled, it will at least ring.

Saints preserve us

Geldof: 'help the planet ... go nuclear'

Plus some other fun stuff. You gotta love him... sometimes.

Times - British cities shun London’s wasteful car tax

Bless. A scheme designed more to pour money into civil service pockets and pensions than any actual benefit to person or planet. Whodathunk?

I rather enjoyed St. Bob Geldof's views on it all recently. Un-PC to the last, this multi-millionaire only bought a hybrid to drive all day and dodge the charge.

Nice one Ken, and all those well paid munchkins in the TFL.

Agreement or Oblivion. And there is no Agreement.

Newsnight - Climate Change

Well, at least I now find out where the films from around the world also cropped up.

Funny old world, eh?

In two sentences we go from the stark choices of agreement versus oblivion to the need for fairness. Which seems to mean, if the ongoing 'debates' are anything to go on, not much agreement. Which leaves...?

I came to this second slot 'Meanwhile, in other news: the end of the world' topic via Mark Urban's excellent and courageous report from Iraq. For what it's worth, enough to reshape some of my views on this mess, and also the BBC's ability to report on things with objectivity. Well done.

But it also highlights the pointlessness of dealing with entrenched positions. Some will not be happy, or change their views, no matter what they are told. Though perhaps what they are told these days and by whom are factors. Trust is a crushed butterfly now.

I am simply struck by how large numbers see fit to ignore basic facts, critique without solution, or fail to accept that some solutions are no longer that simple.

Hence there are US troops in Iraq, Israel exists, and there are 6 billion and counting humans who have or all one day will want a car and a/c. Deal with it. Composting toilets in Islington won't address the bi-monthly trips to Gstaad, my loves.

Or, though sweet, I rather doubt the poppet in the US switching off her lights is going to do much to offset the whole house being cooled 24/7, 365/365, if they live in a Southern state.

Which is what sprang to mind as I saw Roger 'Mr. Benn, I presume?' Harrabin emerging from the jungle in full suit, as was our Minister of hot air. If you wear 3 layers and a neck vice in 30 degrees and 90% humidity, you probably need a bit of carbon-guzzling energy to keep you cool (it would be fascinating to see if all switch off when they leave their rooms, or maybe after a hard day it is nice to come back to more than a silly fan can provide). Along with all the other 5* trappings, such as tinkling fountains and a fresh flower on the pillow each day, all interesting messages that don't quite equate with what the self-appointed messengers seem to be saying.

Not that they are saying very much, or if they do, much that means anything.

'The current draft has a reference to set a target..' I think I heard. Spiffy. That'll do it for the old agreement vs. oblivion balance, quicksmart. We're saved!

Mr. Benn talks reductions/mitigations, but his government and country don't seem to be able to actually do 'em. All I have heard of late is missed or rearranged targets that serve only as topics to justify global jollies to discuss, and the ringfencing of this island by offshore windfarms.

Thing is, I can't seem to get any sense out of anyone as to how these things might work to actually reduce emissions. If they are as green as they look then fine, but if not (deliverables such as actual outputs and reliability - the lasting through design life variety) it's another con to add another nail in the credibility of those who claim to be concerned about our future and acting sensibly to addressing its preservation.

I care, and I do. But heaven help us that, as an environmentalist and climate pessimist and proactivist, I am so sick of the current crop of pols and media camp followers who don't do as they say, I almost feel ready to say the hell with it all and book my own 'study' of 'climate change' in Antarctic for Christmas and join them all round the polar bar for a swift toast to the end of our world.

The end of the world. That's what oblivion means, right? And yet this is the second post on this topic. Maybe the rules of engagement need looking at a bit? And I don't mean in Iraq.

BBC - 'Crunch time' for climate change

He who pays the piper...

Caption: not the best photoshoot of my career, to be sure. That flared page on top is an ad from the travel direct insert that fell out of this edition, along with the Climate Change one. A 'once in a lifetime' 'expedition' to Antarctica, whilst stocks last, no doubt. You follow in the footsteps of Polar explorers, with international flights available at great deals. Hmn.

Wind power is very much in the news at the moment. So it was awesomely useful that a few weeks ago the Sunday Times (also in the news, at least the news on this blog of late- oddly enough regarding selling green opportunities for promotion, only to those that can afford the fee) had an insert on the topic of climate change and sustainability.

Thing is, and if you look at the bottom right you'll see their logo, it was billed as 'in association with' Siemens.

Nothing wrong with a bit of sponsorship, to be sure. I hope for such largesse to swing my way with Junkk.com wherever possible.

Thing is, I rather hope I can do so without the editorial being quite so, how to put it, 'encouraging' to the sponsor, almost to the exclusion of all else. Such as discussing the topic in depth, pro and con (hold that last word in mind).

It's a pity, as many of the articles were indeed fairly valuable in terms of information. However, I have to say that, come the third, my eyebrow was cocked so far I could have been a Jack Nicholson Tribute.

IFC - Ad - Siemens - no prob. It's an ad.
p3 - Facing up to the meltdown - 'German engineering giant Siemens is building...'
p4 - The power brokers - 'Siemens, the German engineering group, is building...'
p5 - Going the extra mile - 'It all requires careful control, and Siemens, the German engineering firm that supplied the system...'
pp6-7 - Always on tap: natures greatest forces - 'The blades of the 25 turbines, built by Siemens, the German engineering conglomerate..'
pp8-9 - Sky-high cost of wasted energy - 'Siemens Building Technologies is one of the market leaders...'
p10 - In search of a brighter future - Osram, one of Europe's leading lighting manufacturers..' Go on.. guess who owns 'em.
p11 - Fast Track to green travel - 'According to Siemens Transpiration Systems...'
Back Cover - Ad - Siemens - No prob.

Now I'm all for a fair exchange of information, but this whole things just came across a tad too much as a leading paper selling itself, and its readers, more than a little short when it came to objective reporting (more like reprinting press releases) of the issues, and giving paid-for free rein to the players who are set to make bazillions out of ensuring they get the work, through shaping how it all gets reported.

Not best impressed, sorry.

Tick, tick, tick ...

That's the countdown started. This from the Guardian CIF by John Sauven reckons we have about 100 months for humanity to sort out CO2 emissions.

He makes some very valid points.......

"Sadly, 'progress' is not just slow, we are moving in the wrong direction. Global energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions are increasing rapidly rather than plummeting. In the desperate scramble to secure energy supplies, the world is becoming ever more dependent on oil supplies from areas of conflict and energy supplies that are environmentally devastating - such as tar sands in Canada and palm oil for biofuels from peatland clearance in Indonesia.

This cannot continue."

Quite.

But many will undoubtedly disagree, and I guess that by about 3 o'clock this afternoon, this CIF post will have turned into the usual set of extremely opposed views and multiple 'knocking the spots off each other' posts.

Seems to be that with anything to do with climate change on CIF t'was ever thus.
___________________
Interesting point from one of the posters.
"Growth at any cost is the basic tenet of all economists - interestingly that's also the basic tenet of cancer"

AWARDS - Sunday Times 'Best Green Companies' - Feb 29

I always have the selfish urge not to share these, as one more entry could be the one that kicks ours into touch.

Not a problem here. I was excited. I was inspired. And then when I saw it was £500 just to enter. So I was moved to ponder... again... that green is a great opportunity to make money. But often for the wrong people for the wrong reasons.

WHEN: February 28, 2008
WHAT: Sunday Times 'Best Green Companies'
WHAT... MORE?: From site - Imagine the benefits a listing could bring you. It would generate credit among the general public for your success and tell all your business partners, suppliers and customers that you are helping to tackle one the of the biggest problems facing all industrialised nations.

The winning companies will be profiled in a dedicated Sunday Times supplement, which will be distributed with 1.3m copies of the paper in the spring next year, and their achievement will also be marked at an awards event. Winners will also be given our special logo for branding on publicity, advertising and letterheads.
HOW MUCH: £500 to kick off!
URL: here
COMMENTS: Good luck Sunday Times, and good luck all who can afford to enter. You (well most of you. I am sure some worthy entrants will scrape the necessary together to enter and might even win despite not having massive ad budgets to dangle or lobbyists to whisper. If you do win, have the courage to say this on the podium for the rest of us to cheer) deserve each other. I'm just not sure the planet, or our kids, do. Sadly, I will be viewing the 'best' result, and any PR that ensues, as shaped by this highly excluding financial requirement.

Anyone can nominate an organisation – from the cleaner to the CEO. I can't be paying my cleaner (er, that's me) enough.