Inconvenient Truth

[mockney piers]

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.

[Huguenot]

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.

[*Bob*]

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.

[mockney piers]

It is a non academic forum *bob*, I can point you in the direction of some very dry and boring published papers if you prefer. They're not very entertaining, but their conclusions are far starker than the twaddle you're seeing here.

[*Bob*]

I know the contents of said dry old papers.. but I'm afraid they have nothing to do with the current standard of energy-saving lightbulbs, nor the relationship between cost and take-up.

[mockney piers]

Is this your way of saying 'lighten up'?

ho ho ;)

[Huguenot]

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'?

[*Bob*]

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> Is this your way of saying 'lighten up'?

>

> ho ho ;)

Pretty much, yes.

[Mark]

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?

[*Bob*]

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.

[mockney piers]

We have an occasional screening night, usually round mine, we call, pompously, the East Dulwich Film club (usually fortnightly tuesdays or wednesdays though we've slacked off a bit of late). Perhaps that could be your first offering Mark.

[mockney piers]

CrystalClear has trumped us all with his second link. Sums it all up quite nicely

[bald marauder]

"We are...the cyclists"! Brilliant! Thanks CrystalClear :)

[Kathryn]

Why dont we ask the dulwich film club to do a screening at the EDT?

[Kathryn]

Sorry only just turned the page to find the East Dulwich film club. No offense taken I hope.

Either way lets see this film

[Quaywe]

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

[geh]

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'?

[bald marauder]

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?

[mockney piers]

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.

[Mark]

> 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)

[bald marauder]

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

[capt_birdseye]

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.

[mockney piers]

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?

[blinder999]

fridge gadget:

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2036183,00.html

[mockney piers]

brilliant blinder, thanks :)