Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm going to drink and post, but just to say that, yes, I'm passionate about how wrong our mindset is, and disgusted about the simple way we can actauly achieve this. And laugh because it's out luxury, and shutup go to bed piers.

Huguenot has the evidence of how angry I get, never let him show my rants, not pretty, not pretty.

I'm glad maraudeur chauve, but honestly it's not difficult to come to that conclusion when you go to places like China.


The people are lovely, but it's incredibly dispiriting to see container lorries go past with rubbish on them brought by leviathan from the UK.


As for the smog, I showed this photo on an other thread:


http://farm1.static.flickr.com/114/251005131_f450721435.jpg?v=0


This is the link back


It was a view from my 28th storey flat window at 3pm. It isn't fog, BJ is dry as dust, that's heavy metals and chemicals from the factories which aren't paid enough by western companies to install filtration systems.


That's not because western companies are bastards, that's because idle minded westerners don't check the provenance of their goods before making a purchase.


That's us. We did that. Not them. Us.

Folks,

There's a certain amount of needless sub-dissertation twaddle creeping in here on the half of the Geh-bashers.. all (s)he's saying is: energy-saving lightbulbs aren't up-to-scratch yet.. and.. if eco-stuff was cheaper / better (or preferably both) then more people would buy it. I don't think this really neccesitates a diatribe on the evils of man.


Unless you all have solar panels on your glass houses then you ought not to be throwing stones.

Sorry Geh - I didn't want this to come across like a personal bash!


I was just responding to 'denial and avoidance' views in general, as they are supported broadly by those who make little effort on behalf of the environment.


I can see Henry VIII's point on this one, so unlike Thomas More I'm going to make sure my silence does not come across as tacit agreement.


I'd like to see those who don't act on the environment to be seen in the same light as drink drivers and street hooligans. It should be socially and morally unacceptable. By the time I start pushing up the daisies it will be, I'm just trying to do my bit to make sure we're not too late.


PS Bob, I didn't mention solar panels and windmills, because the only scientifically recognised solution is (as James said) to cut consumption. As for lightbulbs, I thought this thread was about local reaction to 'An Inconvenient Truth'?

Telling people they're planet destroyers, destroying other countries, idle slackers who don't care about the environment does not achieve the desired effect on it's own. Whereas if B&Q, Homebase, Dulwich DiY etc said to people "have you considered an energy saving bulb instead" that would be better, perhaps incentivise it with a low, low price.


Where I currently work it was brought it up at a staff meeting and now all lights, printers, monitors, phone chargers are turned off (at the end of the day). I'm going to send an email today to our councillors asking if we can have white sodium lights in East Dulwich as they use up 30% less energy (here's an interesting article Lighting the key to energy saving. Oh and I'm going to watch An Inconvenient Truth, in fact does anyone have access to a screening room where we can get together to watch it?

All these things come down to 'degree'.

My friends cousin, William, lived (more or less) down a hole in a wood - for a couple of years - protesting about the building of a new bypass in the local area. By his standards, every single one of us would fail 'the environmental test', just as some here may feel others are failing by their own standards. So what is an acceptable level of responsiblity? And who decides it?

Answers on a postcard. A free energy-saving light bulb (only used once!) goes to the winner.

OK so to get this one back on topic (you all belong in the Lounge!):


1) I'm a greeny (well, more than I'm not anyway) and like the thought of AG's movie and the awareness its provided to all of us ignorant humans about the state of the planet. However I have heard a lot of negative criticism of the movie in that the facts portrayed are very 'selective' and biased. I guess we should expect that to some degree however the film loses credibility if that's the case as it then poses the question of "what's in it for him?". All in all though it's doing some good for the world the desperately needs some people to start caring about it.


2) Southwark Council are selling Home composting kits for a tenner and wormery's for a fiver (+postage) to residents! - Now there's no excuse. Check it out:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/YourServices/environment/RecyclingPages/HomeComposting.html

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sorry Geh - I didn't want this to come across like

> a personal bash!

>

> I was just responding to 'denial and avoidance'

> views in general, as they are supported broadly by

> those who make little effort on behalf of the

> environment.

>

None taken, it may/probably will be the most crucial debate of all! My point is that many may well have the best of intentions but unless positive (i.e. encouraging) methods are employed then they will not be put to good effect.


From your earlier post you touch on the point that may be at the heart of it. We all are accustomed to/expect access to cheap, food, clothing, electrical and other goods. This has accelerated rapidly as our economy has moved from production based to services based, and of course leisure time, and our ability to consume has also increased whilst others have become manufacturers.


These goods are manufactured at a cost that probably vastly exceeds their monetary value but this is not explicit when they are purchased/consumed.


I stand by my assertion that positive fiscal encouragement is necessary to promote take-up.




> I can see Henry VIII's point on this one, so

> unlike Thomas More I'm going to make sure my

> silence does not come across as tacit agreement.

>

> I'd like to see those who don't act on the

> environment to be seen in the same light as drink

> drivers and street hooligans. It should be

> socially and morally unacceptable. By the time I

> start pushing up the daisies it will be, I'm just

> trying to do my bit to make sure we're not too

> late.

>

> PS Bob, I didn't mention solar panels and

> windmills, because the only scientifically

> recognised solution is (as James said) to cut

> consumption. As for lightbulbs, I thought this

> thread was about local reaction to 'An

> Inconvenient Truth'?

A fair and valid point geh. Who do you think should bear the cost of the 'positive fiscal encouragement'? Surely the only valid option is government funding, which would have top be paid for by taxes raised on the 'polluter pays' principle. But if the goods are made in china by chinese contractors (plus other components from elsewhere) then the government would have to tax the whole supply chain, possibly as an additional import tax. This would seem complicated and costly to administer. But I can;t see how/why retailers or manufacturers would underwrite the cost of incentives themselves either. Thoughts?

So the solution to our over consumption is to make our goods cheaper then geh?

Something not computing with me on that one.


Ultimately legislation and punitive measures are the only things that will actually work, we're just going to have to lump it, despite (or rather because) thinking we live in a society where we can have everything we want, almost as our very self-definition.

> So the solution to our over consumption is to make our goods cheaper then geh?


no, but a step towards 'greener living' is to make energy efficient goods cheaper:

Energy efficient bulbs, pack of four - ?18 http://www.greenshop.co.uk/acatalog/index.html?http%3A//www.greenshop.co.uk/acatalog/Low_Energy_Light_Bulbs.html&CatalogBody

Non energy efficient bulbs, pack of four - ?1.49 (Woolworths)

Agreed Mark, not many people (certainly not me) can afford to pay those kind of premiums (no matter how much better it makes us feel. I reckon that Philips (who seem to have been pushing the green angle from the very top of the business for some time now) must be about to deliver eco-lighting that works and is affordable. Question is how long it will take them to do it.

I am enjoying this debate (especially given that I work in a 'green' company) and I must say I am pleasantly surprised by how knowledgeable and passionate many EDF'ers are about the issues. If anyone fanices livening up the comment section of our online eco-magazine, it would be great to get some input from you guys - we really want to get a lively debate going there too (and feel free to send it to anyone not living in ED that you think would be interested too).

http://www.betterthinking.co.uk/magazine

Thanks!

BM

Good point Mark, but what a lot of people don't undertand is that you will be replacing the non-eficient ones a lot more frequently and they will be costing you far more in terms of electricity used.


I finally saw the film last night and I must say, if we have to depend on "average Joe" to make simple lifestyle changes then we are truly f*cked. It has to come from government, at least the EU appear to have recognised the problem and are taking appropriate steps. The fact that the Bush administration is intrinsically linked with car manufacturers, oil companies etc means that change from the world's biggest CO2 contributor is very unlikely, so, once again, we're totally f*cked.


Happy to lend my copy of the DVD out to anyone interested. Just send me a PM if you want a lend.

No ones going to produce this at a loss if the economics simply don't work, and it could just be the case that green bulbs will never be cheap enough to tempt people over.


At that point coercion must be used because using money better spent on public services, to subsidise goods to tempt people over to them is economics of lunacy frankly, but exactly the sort of thing this government would come up with.


A slight aside, last night on BBC London news saw something about an award winning product, basically a wax filled box you attach to your fridge thermostat. It mimics how cold your food is and more accurately manages how often your fridge turns itself on. On average refrigeration bills are reduced to 30 of their previous level.


sadly can't find anything about it on BBC or t'internet.

Can anyone else?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...