On lightbulbs, John Lewis have energy saving ones for 99p
http://www.johnlewis.com/Electrical/Lighting/Lighting+Accessories/Light+Bulbs/3758/ProductType.aspx?SearchTerm=light%20bulb
Jon
>From: Dr Hillary Shaw <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: swindle
>Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 14:27:53 EST
>
>
>What also is worrying about the 'environment' debate (although on an
>ethical-importance scale, far less serious than constraining the
>development of the
>world's poorest)
>is how in the UK especially the concept of "protecting the environment" has
>become synonymous with extra taxation burdens and increased government
>surveillance measures.
>
>If, say, the UK govt was really motivated by green concerns, there would be
>a balance of stick and carrot. We would have, for example, increased fuel
>taxes along with subsidies on public transport. We would have road tolls
>along
>with incentives for householders and businesses to locate in city/town
>centres.
>We would have tax-subsidised low energy light bulbs, along with higher VAT
>on conventional ones, and council tax rebates on houses with solar panels.
>Water rates cuts for houses that soaked away their bath water or recycled
>it
>into the garden. Taxes on flights balanced by government investment in
>local UK
>coastal resorts, and maybe reduced VAT on UK guest house, hotel, rooms.
>
>Where are these 'carrots' ???
>
>By using the stick plus survelliance rather than stick plus carrot, the Uk
>govt is in danger of
>discredting the whole idea of going green, whatever the actual imperatives
>of doing so.
>
>Hillary Shaw, Newport, Shropshire
>
>In a message dated 10/03/2007 12:04:47 GMT Standard Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
>As an environmentalist (since the 1980s) and a human geographer can
>someone
>convince me with the science of CO2 intensity in the atmosphere directly
>impacting upon the 'enhanced greenhouse effect' (or global warming)?
>CO2 is not a predominant gas in the atmosphere, and it contributes only
>about an eighth to greenhouse effect. Moreover, on the scale of things CO2
>emissions from human activity does not compare to that released from oceans
> and
>volcanoes.
>My third puzzlement is how can we know for sure that the changes are
>irreversible and potentially 'runaway' through 'postive feedback'.
>The climate change debate has been very political and more so in recent
>years but all of a sudden I want to be convinced by the science of CO2
>effects on
>the climate.
>Not wanting polemics but facts and scientific demonstration.
>Nick
>
>
>In a message dated 10/03/2007 11:24:19 GMT Standard Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
>Unfortunately, the way the climate change is portrayed in the media means
>the nuanced, multifaceted nature of the debate is completely lost.
>Apparently polemics are the new documentary.
>
>Jon
>
> >From: Nick James <[log in to unmask]>
> >Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: swindle
> >Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 00:36:06 EST
> >
> >_http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/_
> >(http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/)
> >
> >Did anyone watch this?
> >
> >Environmentalists have been painted with one broad brush:
> >We are anti-growth, anti-technology and dead against the use of fossil
> >fuels.
> >Now we are told by this group of scientists that CO2 related global
>warming
> >is all one big swindle.
> >
> >Climate is changing, climate is unpredictable; there have been very warm
> >periods (Medieval in Europe) and cold snaps (when the Thames froze).
> >
> >Professor Stott (a geographer) tells us excitedly about wine and riches
> >when
> >cathedrals were being built in the UK in the medieval days.
> >
> >It is surely the 'uncertainty' that prevails both in the science
> >(incomplete
> >knowledge and arguments about models) and in the social sciences
> >(political
> >and economic debates about costs, development pathways and the
> >precautionary
> >principle).
> >
> >To suggest that all environmentalists wish to stop 'development' in
>Africa
> >is scandalous; Ecological modernisation theory (the main practical
>green
> >orientation) can only be afforded in the North, so it is preposterous to
> >suggest
> >that Africa should be constrained by such a cost.
> >
> >Nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hotmail, News, Sport and Entertainment from MSN on your mobile.
http://www.msn.txt4content.com/
|