Really, who is not in someone else's pockets these days? I think I need to add a twitching nostril to my cranking eyebrow.
A bit too co-operative, Gordon
It seems to be getting worse and is only exceeded by the number of proponents who don't seem to think it matters at all.
Nice to know we have escaped the levels of sleaze of the previous administration, though. This is of an entirely new (Nu?) order.
Remind me... those TV commercial running at the mo'... about ethical investing. Who are they for again?
Junkk.com promotes fun, reward-based e-practices, sharing oodles of info in objective, balanced ways. But we do have personal opinions, too! Hence this slightly ‘off of site, top of mind' blog by Junkk Male Peter. Hopefully still more ‘concerned mates’ than 'do this... or else' nannies, with critiques seen as constructive or of a more eyebrow-twitching ‘Oh, really?!' variety. Little that’s green can be viewed only in black and white.
Showing posts with label ECO-TOWNS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ECO-TOWNS. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Bringing back the man with the red flag?
Sometimes you come across something which at first glance seems 'okaaaaayyyy' but with a deeper read is actually so badly thought out that it makes you think 'how on earth did they come up with that?'
This is one such, from the Telegraph over the Easter break.
"Speed limits of just 15 miles-per-hour are to be introduced on major roads in planned new towns across the country as part of an effort to reduce global warming."
Ok, so when the internal combustion engine is only efficient at reasonably high RPM speeds, then just how does this reduce global warming? See, driving at maximum 15mph, probably in 1st or 2nd gear in most vehicles, will dramatically increase fuel consumption (many vehicles at low revs will manage only about 10mpg), it will dramatically increase pollution (vehicles running at low revs emit more none-combusted fuel and waaaayyyy more CO2 (and even worse, carbon monoxide), not to mention the fact that increased journey times (well, in many, but obviously not all cases) would generally increase fuel consumption too.
But it's only proposed for new 'eco-towns', where everybody will be living within "within 400 yards of public transport stop and 800 yards from shops." Sorry, but without some amazingly high housing packing density, that sounds much more like a small village to me. Oh, just realised, most villages no longer have public transport, pubs or shops now anyway, do they?
Despite being proposed for the new 'eco-villages' [sorry, 'towns'] only, it has, of course, brought the usual mass howls of protest and declarations of lunacy from the majority of posters. If, (and it really is a big if), the public transport system is planned, put into place and operated, correctly, it might just work. If not, then it will, without doubt, create more environmental pollution.
But then, not much that our Gov puts into place seems to ever work out too well; so what are the chances of these 'eco-towns' schemes being a success? I'm not overtly optimistic.
This is one such, from the Telegraph over the Easter break.
"Speed limits of just 15 miles-per-hour are to be introduced on major roads in planned new towns across the country as part of an effort to reduce global warming."
Ok, so when the internal combustion engine is only efficient at reasonably high RPM speeds, then just how does this reduce global warming? See, driving at maximum 15mph, probably in 1st or 2nd gear in most vehicles, will dramatically increase fuel consumption (many vehicles at low revs will manage only about 10mpg), it will dramatically increase pollution (vehicles running at low revs emit more none-combusted fuel and waaaayyyy more CO2 (and even worse, carbon monoxide), not to mention the fact that increased journey times (well, in many, but obviously not all cases) would generally increase fuel consumption too.
But it's only proposed for new 'eco-towns', where everybody will be living within "within 400 yards of public transport stop and 800 yards from shops." Sorry, but without some amazingly high housing packing density, that sounds much more like a small village to me. Oh, just realised, most villages no longer have public transport, pubs or shops now anyway, do they?
Despite being proposed for the new 'eco-villages' [sorry, 'towns'] only, it has, of course, brought the usual mass howls of protest and declarations of lunacy from the majority of posters. If, (and it really is a big if), the public transport system is planned, put into place and operated, correctly, it might just work. If not, then it will, without doubt, create more environmental pollution.
But then, not much that our Gov puts into place seems to ever work out too well; so what are the chances of these 'eco-towns' schemes being a success? I'm not overtly optimistic.
Monday, March 03, 2008
CATEGORY - ECO-HOMES & TOWNS
Indy - Buying an eco-home: Finally something's clicked
Indy - Better than new: Give you home an eco facelift
As I have created the category already, but now need to add a complement (though creating a more eco house is very different to an entire new custom town, there are obvious similarities):
ECO-TOWNS
Guardian - Eco-towns are the greatest try-on in the history of property speculation
Indy - Protesters' fury as ecotown shortlist targets 'unsustainable' locations
Guardian - Now that's my kinda town - good point on the tokenism of the ten.
Times - Just the spot for a new Milton Keynes - I still take some persuading a town is better than no town in purely enviro terms.
Times - Government must clarify its eco town policy - As do these guys
Indy - We're ready to rise up against eco-towns - I'm guessing 'not keen'
Times - Whitehall to force through eco-towns - May the force be..?
Times - Ecotowns: for and against
Indy - What are eco-towns, and how green are they in reality? - Looking at the 'Yes' and 'No' summary above, and comparing them with the main body text, it seems more that 'where there is a 'will there's a 'may'', and even that downward spiral of confidence in the enviROI can be soon extrapolated downwards as those with boxes to tick adjust their targets.
The Register - Tories pledge to flush away eco slums - Safe to say they are not keen.
Telegraph - Time to talk about eco-towns
BBC - Eco-towns plan 'may be unlawful' - From driving to knives, and now this, it rather worries me, as a law-abiding citizen, when those who might be expected to know better about what consitutes breaking 'em use words like 'may'.
BBC - Newsnight - tip off from poster. Missed it and may not get time to catch up, but the blog might point places.
COI - Eco-towns set to face toughest ever green standards
Gaurdian - Put away your prejudices - ecohomes are not ugly - Must be today (5 Aug 08) but all the Guardian Greens are knocking spots off each other for being not green enough or too rich to care about what it costs... odd).
Telegraph - Government paid charity to produce eco-town 'fact' leaflets - Now I have pretty much put anything on a leaflet on the high-irony side of eco-awareness already, but such as this does rather expand the list of those I wouldn't trust even further.
Indy - Eco-town's green benefit exaggerated, ASA rules - The ASA weekly list is a good, if depressing source of Grenwash. I almost passed on this, but as the Indy did not...
No mention of how 'eco' it might really be, mind.
Gaurdian - Green and unpleasant - Still not feeling the love
Gaurdian - We are not nosy parkers - we simply need to measure success - '...we simply need to measure success' . I merely ask, but is that how the way studies work is phrased?
I know bonuses depend on meeting targets, and meeting targets mean pointing at 'success', but wouldn't it be better to set out to discover what the overall enviROI of these things is, good... or.... not so much?
FT - Only one eco-town site classed as suitable - Bearing in mind what has already been consumed to get to this point, is this ratio... acceptable as a measure of the ongoing competencies of those who would claim to lead in these areas?
Gaurdian - Red faces over green towns
Guardian - Eco-towns' death throes - The headline invites a Twainian response, but.... oops! I wonder how many well-meaning folk and how much money was suckered into this one?
Telegraph - Eco-towns bill soars to more than £3m before a house is built - but think of the boxes that got ticked!
Telegraph - NEW - Country diary: the folly of eco towns
Indy - Better than new: Give you home an eco facelift
As I have created the category already, but now need to add a complement (though creating a more eco house is very different to an entire new custom town, there are obvious similarities):
ECO-TOWNS
Guardian - Eco-towns are the greatest try-on in the history of property speculation
Indy - Protesters' fury as ecotown shortlist targets 'unsustainable' locations
Guardian - Now that's my kinda town - good point on the tokenism of the ten.
Times - Just the spot for a new Milton Keynes - I still take some persuading a town is better than no town in purely enviro terms.
Times - Government must clarify its eco town policy - As do these guys
Indy - We're ready to rise up against eco-towns - I'm guessing 'not keen'
Times - Whitehall to force through eco-towns - May the force be..?
Times - Ecotowns: for and against
Indy - What are eco-towns, and how green are they in reality? - Looking at the 'Yes' and 'No' summary above, and comparing them with the main body text, it seems more that 'where there is a 'will there's a 'may'', and even that downward spiral of confidence in the enviROI can be soon extrapolated downwards as those with boxes to tick adjust their targets.
The Register - Tories pledge to flush away eco slums - Safe to say they are not keen.
Telegraph - Time to talk about eco-towns
BBC - Eco-towns plan 'may be unlawful' - From driving to knives, and now this, it rather worries me, as a law-abiding citizen, when those who might be expected to know better about what consitutes breaking 'em use words like 'may'.
BBC - Newsnight - tip off from poster. Missed it and may not get time to catch up, but the blog might point places.
COI - Eco-towns set to face toughest ever green standards
Gaurdian - Put away your prejudices - ecohomes are not ugly - Must be today (5 Aug 08) but all the Guardian Greens are knocking spots off each other for being not green enough or too rich to care about what it costs... odd).
Telegraph - Government paid charity to produce eco-town 'fact' leaflets - Now I have pretty much put anything on a leaflet on the high-irony side of eco-awareness already, but such as this does rather expand the list of those I wouldn't trust even further.
Indy - Eco-town's green benefit exaggerated, ASA rules - The ASA weekly list is a good, if depressing source of Grenwash. I almost passed on this, but as the Indy did not...
No mention of how 'eco' it might really be, mind.
Gaurdian - Green and unpleasant - Still not feeling the love
Gaurdian - We are not nosy parkers - we simply need to measure success - '...we simply need to measure success' . I merely ask, but is that how the way studies work is phrased?
I know bonuses depend on meeting targets, and meeting targets mean pointing at 'success', but wouldn't it be better to set out to discover what the overall enviROI of these things is, good... or.... not so much?
FT - Only one eco-town site classed as suitable - Bearing in mind what has already been consumed to get to this point, is this ratio... acceptable as a measure of the ongoing competencies of those who would claim to lead in these areas?
Gaurdian - Red faces over green towns
Guardian - Eco-towns' death throes - The headline invites a Twainian response, but.... oops! I wonder how many well-meaning folk and how much money was suckered into this one?
Telegraph - Eco-towns bill soars to more than £3m before a house is built - but think of the boxes that got ticked!
Telegraph - NEW - Country diary: the folly of eco towns
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)