Inconvenient Truth

[geh]

BM raises the cost issue ? exactly, in many cases the green alternative is sold at a premium, therefore some form of government intervention is surely necessary to subsidise such goods/services so they are financially attractive to all.

Conversely environmentally damaging good/services are cheap.

It goes against the grain to suggest that state should interfere with the free market but I cannot see a wide adoption of green consumerism with out such encouragement, or until it?s too late

[capt_birdseye]

As I mentioned above, it's often only more expensive in the short term. Using these green devices actually save you money in the long-term. Replace 10 standard lightbulbs in your house with 10 energy-saving ones and you'll save an estimated ?70 pa on your electricity bill. So you've made your money back on the initial outlay within the first year. If you leave a single, standard lightbulb running 24/7 it will cost you about ?80 a year in electricity.

[*Bob*]

Selling eco-products is no different to selling anything else.

Get the product right.

Get the cost right.

Get the marketing right.

.. and VOILA

[capt_birdseye]

Meanwhile the ice caps are melting.

[*Bob*]

Capt B,

The icecaps will not be saved by half-heartedly trying to flog an underdeveloped product. The only people who will buy it are people like you - and me (I bought energy-saving bulbs to replace all my house lights so you are (literally) preaching to the converted here). I was just disappointed with the results, that's all.

I can afford to road-test such a product, but not everyone can. And it's 'everyone' who needs to be convinced to make a difference.

[geh]

capt_birdseye Wrote:

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

> As I mentioned above, it's often only more

> expensive in the short term.

But we are short term animals, that's the problem.

[mockney piers]

geh, I don't know about you but I pay my taxes to provide public services, health, education, policing, defence etc (defence, not attack, but don't get me started on that one).

As gov't money is our money, you'll be paying for your expensive bulbs one way or another, I happen to think with the added administrative costs on shuffling the cash, it's an absurd waste of money.

Ban the gas guzzling bulbs and be done with it, fait accompli.

As capt'n quite rightly points out, we all save in the long run. It's short termism that got us into this mess, and maintaing this as a stance won't get us out of it.

Sticking our heads in the sand won't actually make the problem go away.

We need to stop thinking consumer politics a la thatcher, major and Blair and start thinking about society as common and shared experience, not one defined by consumer choice and market led forces.

[capt_birdseye]

I'm not preaching to you directly, I'm just dis-heartened in general that we live in a world where people won't automatically decide to do the right thing, they have to be incentivised first. Bloody hell, we're actually destroying the world we live in, and doing a far better job of it than any terrorist can manage!

There was a programme on BBC1 last night called Real Story (pretty crap programme in general). One section was discussing people who were up in arms because their councils were only collecting refuse once a fortnight in a "stick" attempt to force people to recycle. Their bins were over-flowing and they complained of health-risks. It seems easy in this instance to blame the council in question but these people seem blinded as to the reason for the council's actions. So much of our domestic waste is recyclable, compostable etc. People really need to start changing their habits and generally that's not going to happen unless they are forced to do so.

[Keef]

On the subject of recycling, I believe people that don't should be hit where it huts most, in their pockets!!! If people were made to pay for any rubbish over a certain allowance, they'd soon start rethinking their habits....

That said, the councils would have to make it easy enough to do... East Dulwich is pretty good for this. I live up in Sydenham, in a big converted building with 14 flats in it. We have NO recycling bins/crates/bags, so my girlfriend and I have to take bags of stuff down to the car park behind the local Lidls where there are about 5 big recycling skip things.

I strongly suspect that most of the people that live in out building don't bother... We have 2 normal sized wheely bins for the whole building, and every week there are loads of bin bags on the ground around them!!! I do blame my neighbours for not putting in the effort, but at the same time, the council (Lewisham) could do a lot lot more to encourage people. Once they do that, they'll be able to justify penalty charges!

[bald marauder]

Mockney, I'm with you 100%, but I get conceptually stuck when I start to think about the implications. If we buy and consume less things (sounds like a good thing right?) then how does the government still raise enough money through taxation to pay for our public infrastructure? VAT must be one of the government's key revenue streams, no? And if we stop spending as much money, comnpanies will make less money, which means they will make people redundant, who we will actually need more money (not less!) to ssupport via state benefits. So, the risk is, if we drastically alter spending, we enter a downward economic and social spiral of epic proportions. As far as I know, no-one has invented a viable alternative to capitalism that will maintain standards of public services - even puttting aside individual comfort and prosperity. I am not meaning to sound cynical, I'm genuinely interested in the alternatives, just not aware of them at the moment. Can anyone enlighten me?

[mockney piers]

Sorry Calvo, that wasn't the impression I was trying to give.

I was less discouraging consuming, more paying closer to opportunity costs for our products. This may have the knock on effect of buying less, but then we'll have more money available for taxation to pay for those things we'll need to pay for such as protecting London from going under the water, paying for all those lovely resource wars we'll end up fighting as the world goes tits up ;)

I'm no expert (putting it mildly) I just get a bit frustrated with the me me me attitude prevalent today. I've seen the UK change for the better and the worse over my 29 years here, but the most damaging change I've seen is a decline in social and community engagement, respect and consideration for others.

As far as I can tell this has become subverted by defining ourselves by individual rights and wants, seemly a position against that of the greater good. And I'm not talking hoodies here, I see it in the chap(ess) losing it over a contested parking space in sainsbury's car park, or people not standing up for someone in need on the tube/bus (I still do).

I can't really offer solutions for this, just laments. Things like the forum have actually helped assuage some of this pessimism in me, there obviously is a desire out there to make things better and engage, which is great.

[Huguenot]

Watched the 'Real Story' outtake on recycling oop North last night (as did earlier poster).

The council (somwhere like South Shields) had a massive problem with zero recycling and consequently reduced bin collections from weekly to fortnightly.

There was no desire to hit customers in the pocket, but through the outrageous stink they managed to make people extremely conscious of rubbish instead of taking it for granted.

Predictable onslaught of outrageoued t@ssers ensued: assaults on binmen, police and council workers. Quote of the programme "I have a right to throw my rubbish away", petitons to council on health and safety, pocket scientists claiming black death and cholera.

How hard do people squirm to avoid doing what is right, when it doesn't cost them a penny? How many of the readers of this post are doing just that; claiming it's a cash problem as a false objection?

Recycling rates 1 year later: 45%

[capt_birdseye]

A colleague of mine indicated that if his council started collecting every 2 weeks or charged for bin collections then he would simply start to burn his rubbish! This from a reasonably intelligent man. I fear that this is the mind-set we're up against.

[Mark]

did he know about the alternatives?

[capt_birdseye]

Yes. Although to be fair he does live in Portsmouth.

[Huguenot]

It would be interesting to know the psychology behind that - arguably the recycling needs less time and attention. Hence the key drivers are neither cost nor effort. Hate perhaps?

[capt_birdseye]

He does hate a lot of people. But this is getting a bit off-topic...

[Jeremy]

I would recycle, but our recycle box keeps on going missing. I have asked for replacements - and they sometimes arrive - but inevitably just disappear again. Not sure what the solution is though... maybe more recycling banks on street corners, etc?

[Keef]

capt_birdseye Wrote:

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

> Yes. Although to be fair he does live in

> Portsmouth.

Poor Poor B@s!ard ;-)

Seriously, that is shocking, he can't be as intelligent as you give him credit for!

[Mark]

Could someone answer these for me:

Do any shops take back their non-recyclable packaging and will they do something decent with it if you do?

Why do lots of breakfast cereals (as an example) still come in boxes and bags? I mean, pasta comes in a nice bag.

What's a good thing for me to do with all those supermarket bags I have (aside from re-use them at the supermarket)?

Why don't more things have refills available e.g. my jar of instant coffee? I'd quite happily by a sealed-bag of Kenco roast, I don't need another jar.

[CrystalClear]

On the take back front, some things are happening (I have no idea what though - this should help: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/topics/producer-responsibility.htm). This seems to be more about producers, rather than small suppliers, taking back their products.

I think a lot of bags are becoming biodegradable, which helps, but a bag tax is a long way off. I guess the easiest thing to do would be to use your own bags for your shopping, thus removing the problem.

[Ko]

Re shopping bags - it always amazes me in Somerfield how hardly anyone uses reusable carrier bags. A 'bag for life' (those big reuseable bags) costs 50p and it is replaced free of charge when it breaks. You can also buy stronger bags for ?1 each at places like AJ Farmers.

When I first got a 'bag for life' from Tesco 6 years ago, one of my friends told me she thought they looked shabby after a few uses and that she wasn't going to use them!

[Mark]

I looked on my non-recyclable carton of milk tonight and is said look at http://www.recyclenow.com for information, so I did. There's a link to the London section http://recycleforlondon.com/index.cfm which is a website whose main heading is "Send someone special a Valentine e-card" and "Top tips for 'green-romancing' on St Valentine's Day". Hmmm, wasn't that six weeks ago?

And I look at "How to recycle plastic?" part of the answer is "Find out the type of plastic that can be recycled in your local area." What?! I'm looking at a website for London about recycling, why doesn't it tell me? Where do I find out? Why can't it have a link to here on it somewhere?

[vicksg]

If anyone would like to see An Inconvenient Truth, I very much recommend the Prince Charles cinema. They were so blown away by it that they have pledged to show it every week during 2007. When I went to see it they also had 3 green business people do a Q & A afterwards. It was great - all that for ?5 or just ?1 without the speakers. www.princecharlescinema.com

[SimonM]

>>If anyone would like to see An Inconvenient Truth, I very much recommend the Prince Charles cinema.<<<

Alternatively, the DVD is now widely available for as little as ?6 if you shop around a bit