You Can Lead A Horse To Water…

…but you can’t make him charge his electric car. Or even buy an electric car…

Every new home will have to install an electric car charging point, Salford council has proposed.

This, despite the fact that Green lunacy is being dropped quicker than a hot potato everywhere else...

Developers will also have to provide the facility in new apartment blocks, Salford council in Greater Manchester has ruled.

The council will use planning laws to introduce the edict as part of a drive to spearhead green technology in the city.

That's all peachy, but have they given any thought to the fact that there's nothing to force people to buy an electric car?

Or is that the second phase of the plan?

It Could Be The New ‘Big Brother’!

After all, at its heart, it's just as mean-spirited and judgemental as the old one:

They have hired bin police forces, stuck microchips in the wheelie bins and dragged their residents to court for disobedience to strict rubbish rules.

Now there is a new option for local councils anxious to ensure that families follow instructions about rubbish - in-bin cameras.

The utter stupidity of that concept (and a few easy ways to subvert it) has already been comprehensively rubbished by Longrider over at 'Orphans'.

But it's the gleeful anticipation of gaining a new power over others that seems to be driving this research:

Researcher Anja Thieme said: 'There is a naming and shaming element to the experiment although it's fun rather than humiliating.

'Waste has a massive environmental impact. By taking a photograph and uploading it to Facebook, the idea is that we create a platform for self-reflection, a permanent reminder.

'It's a bit like having your conscience sat on your shoulder niggling away at you. And on top of that you know that other people are also judging you.'

Sounds delightful, Anja. But what are you going to do when you realise that some people just don't care about the judgements of others?

Furthermore, that they will take perverse delight in subverting and sabotaging your little project at every opportunity?

Because they've looked at you, and people like you, and decided that you won't serve as their conscience if they can help it...

Maybe It's A Sign...

...that I should switch to 'eco-friendly' lightbulbs after all.

I switched on the standard lamp in the lounge this morning, as it was quite overcast at 5:00am. And the lightbulb blew.

Not an unusual occurrence, they do occasionally go 'pop' and you think 'Oh, better go get another bulb'.

Not this one. There was an almighty 'BANG!', 'FLASH!' and then a shower of gently falling pieces of glass, as the top of the bulb blew off like a particularly gruesome US execution in 'Old Sparky' (or like this chap, perhaps).

Not the sort of thing to start the morning with, I have to say. Gets the heart pumping, though...

The Arrogance Of Youth...

A teenage director hopes his homemade documentary will be shown in schools across Oxfordshire to raise awareness during Climate Change Week.

Ross Harrison, 19, from Hailey, near Witney, set out to dispel the myths and find the real facts behind climate change.

Oh, really?

The former Magdalen School pupil, who started the film as a hobby in 2009, said: “I was frustrated with the debate that has been going on for years. I wanted to get to the bottom of it myself. I wanted to make a documentary about climate change but one that gets to the heart of the issue, one that gives an optimistic outlook of what we need to do in the future.”

Sounds good to me! So, did he look at all the facts?

Well....if he did, we don't get to hear about it:

The Cambridge University geography student wrote to top academics including Oxford University staff and journalist and author Mark Lynas.

And he said the project took off when Sir David Attenborough, pictured, agreed to be interviewed. After hours of discussions, the youngster said he was convinced by the scientific evidence put forward by the experts.

Those experts being known climate change enthusiasts. Did he ever interview anyone else?

He said: “Saying ‘climate change is terrible, we’re in big trouble’ hasn’t persuaded many people to rise to the challenge.

“There needs to be a new message that is appealing and inspiring – a fresh movement that anyone can feel part of.”

Hey, if your facts are so compelling, why the need to have a movement, an 'appealing message'? Surely the facts speak for themselves, don't they?

The student gathered sponsorship to get his film shown across the UK and every school in Oxfordshire has been sent the DVD. The documentary has also been shown as far afield as Kenya and the USA.

You can watch or download the film at www.beyondthebrink.org.

And from the blurb on that website, we find out the people he considers 'experts':

Interviews with Sir David Attenborough, Mark Lynas, David Shukman, Prof Dieter Helm, the UK Youth Climate Coalition, and Ross’ grandparents among others...

Yup, every single one a dyed-in-the-wool man-made climate change believer. And Helm is an economist, for heaven's sake!

And I loved my grandparents and valued their opinions, but they weren't scientists. Nor, I suspect, are Ross's...

So this little video is truly a vanity project - Manwiddicombe's 'ecosmugness' writ large.

When Two Tribes Go To War….

..the best thing to do is sit back with a big tub of popcorn and watch the fun:

Soaring food inflation is the result of "immoral" policies in the US which divert crops for use in the production of biofuels instead of food, according to the chairman of one of the world's largest food companies.

Yes, it’s Humanitarians vs Green Fruitcakes.

And Obama has manoeuvred himself right into the middle of it, with unerring accuracy and precision:

Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, the chairman of Nestlé, lashed out at the Obama administration for promoting the use of ethanol made from corn, at the expense of hundreds of millions of people struggling to afford everyday basics made from the crop.

D’oh!

… he reserved especially pointed remarks for US agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack, who he said was making "absolutely flabbergasting" claims for the country's ability to cope with rising domestic and global demand for corn.

That hasn’t pleased the famously-prickly Obama (mal)administration:

Speaking to farmers earlier this month, the Obama administration's agriculture secretary said he found arguments from the like of Nestlé "irritating".

Note that: ‘irritating’. Not ‘wrong’, or ‘malicious’, but ‘irritating’.

Very telling….

Mr Vilsack said: "The folks advancing this argument either do not understand or do not accept the notion that our farmers are as productive and smart and innovative and creative enough to meet the needs of food and fuel and feed and export."

They only have so much land and so many hours in the day, though, don’t they?

‘Eco-Construction’..?

A sustainability-themed version of Top Trumps has been launched at Kingston University.

Eco-construction trumps look at the qualities of different construction materials, such as the toxicity, durability and ease of recycling.

I'm sure it'll be a huge hit...

The game was developed over six months as a teaching tool for surveying students, by Kingston University PhD student John Clarke.

Indoctrinate 'em young!

Mr Clarke said: “At this stage, my calculations are provoking debate among sustainability experts, which I see as a positive thing – I am taking their feedback on board as I develop the cards.”

I wonder just what the 'debate' is..?

"When I became interested in eco-construction, one of my biggest challenges was to persuade my Dad.

"He was a self-employed builder who spent his working life trying to keep costs manageable, so it took a while to persuade him that what seemed a more expensive, sustainable building material could make more economic sense in the long run."

I bet it did!

"Now Dad’s come round to my way of thinking, I’m confident I can win over anyone."

Better not hire Mr Clarke’s dad to do any building work, folks. It’ll cost you…

Johann Hari – Reliably Wrong About Everything…

Gosh, where to start?

The same predictions are made about every disaster – that once the lid of a tightly policed civilization is knocked off for a second, humans will become beasts. But the opposite is the case.

Really?

When the social scientist Enrico Quarantelli tried to write a thesis on how people descend into chaos and panic after disasters, he concluded: "My God! I can't find any instances of it." On the contrary, he wrote, in disasters "the social order does not break down... Co-operative rather than selfish behaviour predominates". The Blitz Spirit wasn't unique to London: it is universal.

It’s a myth that there was no looting in the Blitz. You do know that, don’t you, Hari?

You have done some research, haven’t you?

From this disaster, we can learn something fundamental about our species. It should guide how the Japanese authorities behave today – and kill off right-wing ideologies based on the belief that humans are inherently selfish tomorrow.

Right-wing ideologies?

I thought it was the left that believed in the need for a huge State apparatus to ensure that no sparrow fell without the benevolent hands of someone else’s money cushioning its fall?

Remember the gangs "marauding" through New Orleans, raping and even cannibalising people in the Super-Dome after Hurricane Katrina?

I remember the reports, yes.

It turns out they didn't exist. Years of journalistic investigations showed them to be racist rumours with no factual basis.

But not from right-wing journalists, eh, Hari? You do remember it was some left-wing race-hustling lunatic in the ‘Huffington Post’, don’t you?

Yes, there was some "looting" – which consisted of starving people breaking into closed and abandoned shops for food.

Oh, right. Like these guys. Maybe all the fishing rods were so they could catch their own food, eh Johann?

And obviously, these residential houses were cunningly disguised food warehouses, rather than places filled with electrical goods and personal belongings?

Still, you can always count on Hari to push his new-found ecolunacy whenever he gets the chance:

This is likely to be a century of ecological disasters, since each year we destabilize our climate more, in the face of plain scientific warnings.

So called ‘climate change’ isn’t causing tsunamis, you idiot.

Normally, in northern Japan, the night sky is blocked out by the yellow-orange haze of light pollution. Tonight, huddled together, the people there can see the stars.

Oh. Wow. Talk about a silver lining. There’s not really much one can add to that last, is there?

Wait. Yes there is. People have died in their thousands, and you’re happy that the survivors can see the stars without light pollution?

You, sir, are a fourteen-caret scumbag.

BANNG!

No, not a typo, but the sound made by a pressure group shooting itself in the foot over the Fukushima incident:

Professor Andy Blowers, chairman of Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (Banng), said the incident was proof nuclear power was too dangerous.

Opportunistic little shit.

But Miriam Lewis, a Maldon district councillor, said: “However Banng tries to dress up its pseudo-intellectual scaremongering intentions, making political gain out of such a tragedy as has occurred in Japan is disgusting. Any interest I may have had in understanding the Banng point of view has just disintegrated.”

Heh! Nice one!

And We Have To Have These Things In Our Houses?

A street in Southend had to be cordoned off after a mysterious mercury spill.

A whole street?

One fire crew from Rayleigh Weir attended the scene and had to wear special protective masks and clothing to suck up the mercury, which was scattered over a two foot section of the street.

Only two feet? Is this a ‘H&S gorn mad!’ story or is this stuff really that toxic?

A specialist waste disposal team was also at the scene to take away the chemical before the road was reopened shortly after 1.10pm.

I wonder if this is the result of some of those new ecoloon-approved bulbs we are all expected to buy breaking?

Still, it’s for a vital cause, and we’ve all got to do our bit, eh, Mr Piebalgs?

Oh. Right. Not you, though:

… Mr Piebalgs, the former European Commissioner for Energy, has left the outside lights burning day and night on his £1.25 million luxury home despite neighbours claiming he has not been seen there for weeks.

*grinds teeth*

A spokesman for Mr Piebalgs declined to comment.

However, it is understood the lights are a security measure.

Gosh, really? Whoever would want to do him harm..?

It’ll Smell Better Than Their Stores…

Beth Vamhimsbergh, from Lush Cosmetics, in Sir Isaac’s Walk, Colchester, has agreed to be covered in “oil”, or in actual fact, a type of molasses treacle, and draped in the Canadian flag.

The protest aims to mark the launch of Lush’s campaign against Canadian tar sands oil, which the store says is destroying ancient forests.

How are people supposed to drive to your stores if we don't extract oil? How are you going to get your supplies, if the oil runs out?

Nice Reputation You’ve Got Here. Be A Shame If…

…anything was to happen to it:

… the veteran children’s TV presenter is paying the price for his outspoken remarks.

Yes, it’s Johnny Ball and The Persecutors Of The Skeptical.

He claims the internet has been used to try to discredit his opinions.

Bloggers have run campaigns stating Mr Ball ‘should not be allowed near children’.

And an imposter has even tried to cancel his booking at a training day for maths teachers in Northampton.

OK, so it’s not exactly crime of the century, but come on! Trying to ruin his livelihood?

Isn’t that the actions of someone who isn’t sure secure in their own claims?

He said: ‘This was clearly a criminal act to damage me and my career business. People have every right to make up their own minds on my stance. But to deliberately smear my name in ways that are clearly criminal is so very disappointing.

‘I would hope it is not the way fair and sensible debate is going in this far more open, modern society.’

Ah. I see where you are going wrong there, Johnny. It’s that ‘fair and sensible’ bit. They don’t like ‘fair and sensible’. They don’t like it at all...

They certainly don’t like you pointing out that mankind has the unique ability to find ways round any inevitable climate shift with technology:

… my main concern is that the alarmism is actually frightening schoolchildren to an alarming degree.

‘It is suggesting to them that the previous generation have all but ruined the planet, and unless they switch stand-by lights off, for instance, we could all be going to hell in a handcart.

‘This does nothing to promote confidence in our young. It sends the message that all technology is harmful. Yet, in truth, great strides are being made.

'Gas-fired power stations now produce twice as much power for the same fossil fuel as they did 15 years ago. Cars have far cleaner exhausts and have doubled their mileage and tyre wear, and they are all recyclable or reclaimable.

'These are success stories.’

Quite.

Mind you, it could just be someone annoyed at his part in inflicting Zoe Ball on Radio 2. I could sort of agree with that…

I Guess The Lewisham Green Party Isn't Short Of Money..

...why else would they repeat a survey that has already been carried out?

A survey has revealed that a third of shops on Lewisham High Street leave their doors open all day.

The survey carried out by Lewisham Green Party covered 75 shops in the main shopping area.

So what, you might say? It's their money to waste?

Well, yes. But as always, 'something must be done about this!':

Lewisham's Green councillor, Darren Johnson, has slammed the waste of energy and called on the council to work with local retailers to tackle the problem.

And this is the job of the council? The one that's whining about how strapped it is for cash? Just what does he expect them to do?

Cllr Johnson has tabled a formal question to the next Council meeting, calling on the council to work with local retailers and to join the "Close the Door" campaign.

The campaign works with local authorities and retailers nationally to encourage them to close the door and save energy.

Ah. I see. It's just designed to raise the profile of the Green Party then?

Because surely there's no-one in business in this country who is unaware that their heating is escaping through an open door?

Stamping On Individual Choice

Tim Lang (professor of food policy at City university)

I am sufficiently ancient to wonder sometimes if modern political parties might have a collective memory problem. The last Tory government was bombarded by food crises for a decade – remember salmonella and BSE? It mismanaged these spectacularly at times.

But the Labour government fixed it, right?

Labour's response was to set up the Food Standards Agency (FSA), designed to "create blue water between us and safety difficulties", as one minister told me in 1998.

Ah, yes. The FSA. The department that brought us such ideas as the need for thicker chips, the need for portion control and the burning need for bigger menus. Well, I think we can safely lose them.

And so now, the ConDems have pulled the plug.

The new government has now decided to dismember the FSA. Its role as public health adviser on nutrition is to be absorbed into the department of health; its role as inspector of farms, food processing plants and so on will revert to Defra.

Who could argue against that?

Well, Tim’s going to have a damn good try.

Even before this dismemberment, what the FSA could achieve was limited. In particular, it was not able to consider the impact on the broader environment – cultural or ecological – when making recommendations to the public about food. The FSA lacked capacity to deal with the environmental implications of defining a sustainable diet, for example.

Oh, oh. I don’t like the sound of that…

Are we perhaps back in beetleburger territory?

Take the question, should I eat fish? Nutritionists say yes; fish stock analysts say no. To answer that question required the FSA to integrate ecological into nutritional advice. It fudged that one.

It’s possible for both those answers to be correct, Tim, and for the public to make up their own mind…

This matters. Take meat and dairy. They account for a huge proportion of consumers' food footprint. So should the UK cut its meat and dairy consumption? Yes, say health experts and environmentalists; no, say industry interests.

And what do the public say? Do they even figure in your thoughts?

Health secretary Andrew Lansley's recent speech to the Faculty of Public Health reiterated the mantra of pursuing "evidence-based policy". Quite right, but what if evidence competes? If the UK is to meet its legal obligations to meet climate change emission targets, this has to be addressed.

Well, maybe that ‘legal obligation’ is based on nothing more than smoke and mirrors? Maybe the 'climate change' movement is a giant con?

Should we not check out the evidence for that? Since we’re in an evidence-gathering mood?

The pursuit of cheaper food underestimates real costs. Who pays for climate change? Is the real cost of the good water going into that Kenyan green bean included in your checkout bill? And why is it easier to quench your thirst with a sugary soft drink than in a public, free water fountain?

It might be ‘easier’, but it’s actually more expensive. So if people are spending money on it, it must be because they want to. Maybe they prefer the taste?

Tackling obesity is like tackling climate change. It requires system change, and cannot be reduced to individual choice.

If we have no individual choice, we have slavery. Is that what you wa…

Oh, I’m wasting my time. It probably is what you want.

We can't go on eating as we are – destructive choices (eating more food that has been flown thousands of miles, for example) need to be edited out, and only governments can set the framework.

And the mask slips, to reveal the gibbering control-freak underneath. Welcome to the new world order according to Tim – you will eat what the government tells you, and like it…

Yes, Beetle Tastes Nothing Like Chicken, but…

…at least the whole family gets a leg!

With around 70 per cent of the world's agricultural land now being used for meat production, a Dutch insect specialist has suggested a novel way of catering to the world's growing population – by eating insects instead of mammals.

Insects! What the hell is this guy smoki…

*checks nationality*

Ah. Right…

Speaking at the TEDGlobal 2010 conference in Oxford, entomologist Marcel Dicke claimed that insects are an ecologically sound – and tasty – alternative to meat.

Dicke, a professor at the Netherlands' Wageningen University, said that while 10kg of feed generates just 1kg of beef, 3kg of pork or 5kg of chicken, the same amount could sustain 9kg of locusts.

Marcel Dicke – not just a name, but a description….

Sometimes A 'Daily Fail' Headline Makes You...

...breathe a sigh of relief:


Sorry, my misanthropy got the better of me for a moment.

I blame the fact that it appeared almost next to this story:

A green-fingered businessman was stunned when he was hit with a £100 fine for fly-tipping - when he left flowers in parking space for a work colleague.

Financial adviser Stephen Mayes, 56, brought two plants from his garden and left them in a colleague's parking space so she could load them into the boot of her car when she arrived at work a few minutes after him.

But within moments of unloading the plants a council warden pounced on Mr Mayes, cautioned him 'like a policeman' and slapped a £100 fine on him for fly-tipping.

Well, you'll say, this is just a case of an over-zealous local government official, and I'm sure it was all sorted out amicably in the end, and everyone had a good laugh about it?

No:

'I explained they were plants for a lady in the office he said it was fly-tipping. He started cautioning me, like a police officer would do, I honestly couldn't believe it I thought it was a wind up.'

Sadly for Mr Mayes, Jeremy Beadle wasn't lurking in the shrubbery. This was a deadly serious affair, as demanding money with menaces and blackmail always is...

Mr Mayes, who lives with his wife Suzanne, 55, who is a priest, wrote to Havering Council to explain what had happened but his pleas fell on deaf ears.

A hand delivered letter from the council said they had sufficient evidence to prosecute him and he could be fined £2,000 and ordered to pay magistrates court costs.

He added: 'I spoke to my wife about it and decided I didn't want it hanging over me so I paid up. That is not an admission of guilt, I didn't do anything wrong but I didn't want it hanging over me any more.

'I think the council are just picking on easy targets.'

Read the letter in the 'Mail' article.

It isn't composed of snipped-out individual letters glued to a sheet of writing paper and wrapped round a brick thrown through his window, but that's the ONLY way in which it differs from your standard TV-drama blackmail note.

The blackmailers, though, when caught, do at least usually have the nous to sound contrite, in hopes of a lighter sentence.

Not this mob:

Councillor Barry Tebbut, cabinet member for the environment on Havering Borough Council, said: 'Mr Mayes admitted to littering when he paid the fine.

'If he did not think he committed an offence, then he could have appealed to magistrates.

'This was explained when the notice was issued and in later correspondence.'

The comments under the item make a point of noting that iDave got their votes because this was the sort of thing they expected him to stamp out.

Well, that should be easy; Tebbutt is one of his, after all.

I wonder if he's feeling a bit sheepish at the antics of one of his own?

Update: Witterings from Witney notes that:

"... it is interesting that, reading between the lines, the litter warden got his 'wrists slapped' for not issuing a ticket for fly-tipping, but instead one for the lesser offence of 'littering' - a factor which once again speaks volumes about local authority mentality!"

21st Century Enlightenment – I Don’t Think We Can Afford It…

Madeline Bunting on…well, who knows, frankly?

We've had months of discussion (and confusion) about the Big Society, years of entertainment from Big Brother, so perhaps it's only timely that this week will see the launch of some Big Ideas.

Oh, really?

This is the territory explored in a pamphlet calling for a "21st-century Enlightenment" to be published this week. "Big" in this context clearly cannot be dismissed as a marketing ploy; ideas don't come much bigger.

It's an intriguing set of ideas pulled together by Matthew Taylor (former Downing Street policy adviser to Tony Blair), in part to sketch out what an institution founded in the 18th-century Enlightenment ought to be doing – the answer being to generate the 21st-century Enlightenment, and this is now the new strapline for the Royal Society of Arts. No small ambition here.

Well, if we can’t rely on the Royal Society of Arts to save us all from annihilation, who can we rely on, I always say…

The questions that underlie Taylor's pamphlet are echoed in the soul-searching around Labour's defeat: what do words such as liberal or progressive mean, and what kind of politics do they require?

Do you mean the original definition of those words, or what the now-corrupted term says to people?

We already know what kind of politics they require, thanks very much…

…can we still have faith in an idea of progress when the very inventions and ways of life that were thought would bring it about – market capitalism and individual freedom – are wreaking unprecedented environmental destruction?

Yes! Let’s smash market capitalism and individual freedom! That way lies enlightenment, I’m sure!

There is a deeper problem about anchoring the effort to defend progress in the 18th-century Enlightenment: it lands you squarely in a fraught argument about Eurocentrism. Too often citing the Enlightenment is a precursor to an attack on other systems of thought – such as Islam; too often appeals to an Enlightenment legacy are a code for privileging this European period of intellectual creativity.

At its crudest, it can amount to a land grab for civilisational superiority in which the west has brought progress to the world.

Do you really believe that the west hasn’t brought progress to the world? Particularly in comparison to Islamic societies?

You are, I presume, allowed to drive to work, to work, in fact. To submit articles for a national newspaper damning the society that provided you with every privilege?

To wear as little as you like, secure in the knowledge that any assault on your person will not be blamed on your dress?

We need to live very differently, and that requires thinking very differently. What's required is another revolution of the mind, a paradigm shift in human consciousness.

Why, exactly, do we need to ‘live differently’?

And just who is ‘we’?

Are you going to ‘live differently’, Madeline?

Just as the scientific insights of the 17th century led to the Enlightenment's profound shifts in the understanding of the individual, and the idea that the social order could and should be changed, so Taylor hopes science can prompt dramatic shifts in self-awareness, in how we understand human behaviour so that we replace individualism with more socially connected relationships of solidarity.

Ah. Now it all becomes clear…

The second source of his optimism relies on heavy borrowing from the recently published The Empathic Civilisation, in which Jeremy Rifkin argued that history is marked by human beings' increasing empathy for others…

Oh, dear…

Empathy can save us, believes Taylor; it is vital to negotiations on how we share out natural resources, and vital to ensure harmonious co-existence on a crowded planet.

Yes, we need to join the Collective, eh, Madeline? Emulate bees and ants?

Taylor's faith in empathy is widely shared, for example by those campaigning on aid for the developing world.

Well, of course it is. They are pretty keen on anything which pries money out of the banks of suckers.

They need to eat too, after all.

Ethical reasoning and debate need to be resurrected. We need an ethics that challenges the dominant logics of market, bureaucracy, and scientific and technological development. Just because something will sell doesn't mean it should be sold; just because something can be discovered and developed doesn't mean it should be – now so painfully evident in the Gulf of Mexico disaster.

Yes!

Say ‘No!’ to discovery and development! Say ‘No!’ to human progress and invention! Join us toiling in the fields night and day! Follow Madeline to…

Hey! Madeline, aren’t you coming?

Ostentatious Consumption

Rebecca Seal in the ‘Guardian’ on that tricky question of how to ensure that your barbeque is as eco-friendly as possible:

Last year, in spite of the dire summer, we hardy Brits had 120m barbecues, making us the barbecue capital of Europe, according to the National Barbecue Association. The "alfresco eating industry" is worth £7bn annually (presumably companies making rainproof gazebos and waterproof fleece are also doing well), but, unfortunately, few of us realise how environmentally unfriendly a traditional barbecue can be.

I think that ought to read: ‘few of us care’, don’t you?

Those who think an outdoor gas grill is the green solution are quick to point out that charcoal releases more than 100 times as much carbon monoxide as gas. But although it's true that gas is a more efficient fuel for cooking, charcoal is carbon neutral as it releases carbon tied up temporarily in the tree it was made from.

And we wouldn’t want to be too efficient, would we? Not when we can be less…

Most charcoal briquettes are made from hardwood culled from tropical forests that could do with being left alone. And they are also usually doused with firelighter solutions which can taint your food. The solution is to buy British lumpwood charcoal from sustainable sources, such as coppiced trees in managed woodland and forests.

Hmm, sounds a bit on the pricy side, doesn’t it?

Sarah Mooney from Bioregional, an entrepreneurial charity that sells British charcoal (available from Homebase and Sainsbury's, from £7 a bag), says: "Our charcoal has a more open structure than hardwood charcoals, so it doesn't need to be impregnated with lighter fuel. It burns for far longer so, although it's a bit more expensive, you'll use much less."

Yikes! £7 a bag! I should hope so! I'd expect it to go all night for that price.

Start your barbecue using twists of rolled-up newspaper, with the charcoal stacked on top, or natural firelighters such as those from If You Care (available from goodnessdirect.co.uk, 72 for £3.97), which are made from wood and vegetable oils.

Why not encourage people to rub two sticks (of sustainable British wood, natch) together..? Or would that be a health and safety risk?

You could also build your own barbecue using an oven rack and some old bricks, or an old oil drum cut in half – you'll have to weigh up the ethical points scored by not buying something new against less efficient cooking.

Mmm, weighing up ethical points. Yes, that’s certainly always on my mind when I’m planning a BBQ…

Rather than using paper plates, stock up on crockery from charity shops or buy palm leaf plates that biodegrade (25 plates, £11.99).

£11.99!!!

At this rate, I won’t be able to afford any food for this BBQ. Let’s hope that that’s not also an ethical minefie…

Oh.

Finally the food. There are far more interesting and ethical things to cook than cheap beefburgers, sausages, or Day-Glo chicken. Ben Spice, head chef at Acorn House and Water House, two of London's most environmentally friendly restaurants, suggests farmed tilapia fish or arctic char. "Unlike lots of farmed fish, tilapia is not fed dried fishmeal (which could have come from all sorts of untraceable, endangered fish), but sustainable organic matter. Similarly, farmed arctic char, a pale pink fish halfway between salmon and trout, barbecues well and is also fed on traceable fish meal. M&J Seafood is good for both."

They don’t say how much it costs, this time. I suspect I know why…

Both he and Henry Dimbleby, a restaurateur and founder of the Sustainable Restaurant Association, agree that squid is also a great choice. "It's the most sustainable fish at the moment, as we have overfished their predators and they're multiplying with abandon," says Dimbleby.

Thanks to our ‘green’ waste disposal efforts, so are rats and foxes. Want me to throw one of those on my barbie too..?

Seriously, who, other than neurotic Guardianista, can afford to concern themselves with this sort of thing?

Plastic Bags…Again!

Claims by leading supermarkets that they are cutting back on wasteful plastic bags have been exposed as a sham.

So..?

Consumer group Which? ordered the same 29 items from Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Asda, Ocado and Waitrose.

Tesco used 13 bags, Sainsbury’s supplied ten, both Ocado and Asda packed the order in nine bags and Waitrose used just eight.

But both Tesco and Asda also packed four items in a single bag each.

Oh noes! Will the world end?

Which? said: ‘Online supermarkets like to use their websites to boast about environmental credentials, but when you use these sites for shopping, the number of carrier bags delivered to your door can be staggeringly wasteful.

‘Tesco and Asda each delivered four bags containing only one item. Both, for example, put one loaf of bread in its own bag.’

Umm, yes, so do most people. You see, bread is squashy. You don't want to plonk a couple of bottles and a few tins on top of it.

Well, not unless you've got a very odd-shaped toaster....

Tesco, which gives away more free plastic bags than any other store, has talked up its efforts to cut down on the waste and blight they cause.

The chain highlighted the fact that it had switched to degradable bags, claiming this would ensure they rot away when discarded.

However a subsequent Government study found these are more harmful to the environment than conventional plastic bags.

The bags, which are designed to break down after a couple of years, leave behind a plastic soup of tiny particles that could harm birds, insects and mammals.

So, the supermarkets are damned if they do, and damned if they don't...

‘Waitrose was the most sparing in its bag use, although packing food in specific groups – such as frozen – meant that some of the bags were still underpacked.’

And yet, the Earth still turns...

Remember, If You Get A Fine For Not Recycling…

…the answer is ‘No speakee Engrish’:

Bin snoopers have dished out the first ever recycling fine in Basildon.

A family was given the £75 charge after a rubbish inspector rummaged through their bin bags and found leftover food had not been separated from newspapers.

But then the council ran into a tricky problem…

The fine was later cancelled when it was discovered the family, who are Chinese, had not responded to written warnings because they didn’t understand English.

So, get ready for recycling advice to immediately be printed in 57 languages by your local council...

Malcolm Buckley, councillor responsible for the environment, said: “This was an isolated case and a problem was caused because of a language barrier. Once our inspector visited them, they were happy to start recycling in the way they should.”

Note that: the way that should...

According to whom?

That Law Of Unintended Consequences Again…

Householders who burn their rubbish at home are now the main source of dioxin poisons in the environment, an inquiry has found.

And why would householders need to burn household rubbish in the first place?

Three guesses:

The findings follow deepening concern about the spread of rubbish-burning by householders whose waste is no longer collected by binmen.

Burning and fly-tipping have become an alternative for many families...

/facepalm

The latest inquiry was completed for DEFRA by consultants AEA last year, but its report was never published. Ministers have now put a copy in the House of Commons library.

It’s a wonder they didn’t light a fire somewhere in Whitehall and burn it, isn’t it?

Because it’s evidence of their utter failure to understand that actions have consequences…

Tory communities spokesman Caroline Spelman said: ‘Weekly rubbish collections were introduced because of the harm to the environment from fly-tipping and backyard burning. Yet the lessons of the past have been forgotten.

‘Labour’s bin bully policies have slashed back proper bin collections. Now Labour ministers have conspired to cover up the serious threat to public health their policies have caused.’

And DEFRA immediately announced plans to reverse its environmental policies and ensure sanity reigned once more in…

Oh, who am I kidding:

A spokesman for DEFRA said: ‘It is an offence for householders to dispose of their waste in a manner likely to cause pollution of the environment and human health, such as by burning.

‘Domestic waste should be disposed of via the proper routes provided by the local authority.’

Might as well try to argue with a Dalek…

H/T: Al Jahom, who points out that the local Tory council actions don’t exactly match their spokeswoman’s rhetoric…