Posts Tagged ‘Green’
Green Living
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on March 12th, 2010
Interested in living more greenly, but don’t know how: collaborate with us all here: Green Living Grog.
Recycle your tetra paks
Posted by: Gav in Uncategorized on August 19th, 2008
You may know, if you live in Adur District, that we can recycle cardboard cartons used for drinks like orange juice etc. And if you live in Worthing, the same is true (as we share this service).
But if you live elsewhere, the following website shows which Councils can recycle cartons.
Green questions unanswered
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on July 9th, 2008
I thank readers for commenting on my last green question post but I think I didn’t make myself clear. Perhaps it is obvious that I was right that the kettle uses more fossil fuels than a kettle, but there are many other questions we don’t know the answer to.
For example, is it better to drive at 45mph in fifth gear or 39mph in fourth gear if both make the engine do 2000rpm? Is it better to go slowly, change gear less but stay in a low gear or go slightly faster (where the engine is more efficient) but need to change up and down gears regularly? Is it better to keep an old inefficient, working boiler or waste the manufacturing effort of making a new efficient boiler (without mentioning the associated waste costs)? Is it better to throw out a massive, old cathode ray television and replace it with an LCD TV, or keep using it until it dies? Or should you replace your TV with an LCD one at all because of the metals used in their manufacture (even though they’re massively more efficient)? Should I use my unused energy-wasting lightbulbs or skip them for the energy saving ones I have in the drawer and throw the old-style ones away?
Now some of those questions are obvious, and I do know the answer) but some are not and there’s no single place where I (Joe Public) can find the answer easily. Those thousands of volunteers that Rob is hoping for need this information.
Green taxes re-thought
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on July 9th, 2008
George Osborne was on Radio 4 this morning making a very clear and intelligent argument in favour of the principle of green taxes.
I think most people these days are a little cynical about green taxes. Isn’t it true, they say, that green taxes are about revenue rather than behaviour? Isn’t it true that outside of London there is no viable alternative to private transport? And isn’t it true that a tax meant to disincentivise a behaviour, in the absence of an alternative, serves only to hurt the lower and middle earners?
Well Osborne’s solution is to create price stability — ensure the effective price of oil maintains a certain level and there will be a realistic chance of people investing in alternatives. Make long-term guarantees about the minimum level of landfill tax and then companies can be sure that it is worth investing in making money out of the situation.
While we would all like to believe that people and companies do the right thing because it’s the right thing, there’s absolutely no harm in allowing companies to profit from environmentally friendly practices. Even though there are arguments about the ‘green-ness’ of the Toyota Prius, no-one can claim it has been bad for the Toyota company.
Our current government announces things at pre-budget report stage and if they’re unpopular, changes its mind on the day of the budget. Osborne and co. have promised that there won’t be a raft of surprise new measures on the day of the budget which will allow companies and early-adopter consumers to know that their purchases and money-making exercises are going to have a sound-business case in five years time.
Like social welfare and the NHS, the Conservatives have taken the lead on another policy area — environmental realism.
Green questions
Posted by: Gav in Uncategorized on June 10th, 2008
Everyone who cares about the environment (which I do despite my disagreements with left-wing environmentalists) must ask questions like this, but does anyone really know the answer?
The other day I was filling the kettle and accidentally overfilled it. So in an effort not to waste electricity I emptied the kettle down to the level where it contained enough water for the two cups I was making. My girlfriend asked whether I had done the right thing: Had I wasted more energy in wasting cleaned water than I had saved in not causing the kettle to stay on longer?
The question is a reasonable one. And it is a similar question to many others we all must ask as we go about our daily lives. So if human-caused climate change is such a big issue, why isn’t the results of research into these things being made available?
One final comment: I would like to apologise; my stats tell me that a small number of you have visited here almost every day since my last post — thank you and sorry for the delay in resuming service. Oh, and if you saw the Netherlands, Italy game last night, lucky you. Wasn’t it great?!
Train or car (no dilemma)
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on February 9th, 2008
I would really like to have given a few more updates this week, but I really don’t have enough time!
So just a quick note: I am going into town later to do some shopping. I am literally a two minute walk from the railway station and, for all my differences of opinion with left-wing environmentalists, I do care about the ability of this planet to support humanity. I therefore decided to get the train in.
But then I was reminded that I have to go over to Ditchling tonight — I may have time to come back but I may not. Once again the lack of a genuinely available public transport system has caused me to burn unnecessary carbon. It is the responsibility of all of us to do what we can to protect the environment, but some of “all” of us have more capabilities to do that. Central government needs to make strong, clear policy announcements on public transport, and especially the railways, in the South East generally, and in the countryside specifically.
There are clearly not enough tracks between Brighton and London (fast trains must go sufficiently after a so-called slow-train that it does not catch the other train up — how pointless is that?) and there are absolutely no tracks (or buses in most cases) between rural towns and villages in Sussex.
Climate Change can be solved
Posted by: Gav in Gavin Ayling's blog on June 29th, 2007
During a week where wild fires have spread across Greece, literally unprecedented rain has affected England and killed four and where Italy and the surrounding area have experienced unusual heat, it is difficult to avoid the suggestion that climate change is having an effect. I still have a nagging doubt, but it’s meaningless to debate anyway in my opinion.
Interestingly, though, June’s Scientific American magazine has a passage which I think presents the barrier to solution quite clearly:
To accomodate the economic aspirations of the more than five billion people in the developing countries, the size of the world economy should increase by a factor of four to six by 2050; at the same time, global emissions of greenhouse gases will have to remain steady or decline to prevent dangerous changes to the climate. After 2050, emissions will have to drop further, nearly to zero, for greenhouse gas concentrations to stabilize.
Assuming the scientific community’s poor understanding of the climate is accurate then it is reassuring that the solution (technology) as proposed by the author (Jeffrey D. Sachs) costs approximately 1 penny per kilowatt hour. That’s on top of a current electricity price of approximately 8.1 pence.
I have long said that environmental-socialism is not the solution and I am heartened to read the technological-solution being espoused.
