Pop-up Repair Events

My one-time colleague Rod Janssen has posted this in the latest edition of his Energy In Demand blog.

These are worthy approaches to extending the working lives of many artefacts but the big breakthrough will only come when manufacturers cease to build for obsolescence. I hate it when, say, a small plastic cog shatters or is stripped of its teeth and you find that a replacement is no longer available from the originator. The effort of finding a new part from who knows where is what needs to be surmounted and, unfortunately, that's what defeats most people.

Triodos to launch new current account

This from Edie.

Good luck to them but somehow I think there needs to be a big general hook as well as the sustainability one.

Brexit and my MP - Part 11

Finally, a response to previous communications.

Sadly, the usual old tosh.

Sigh!!

Brexit and my MP - Part 10

Dear Mrs Milton

I was appalled to read in the Sunday Times last weekend (9 April 2017) indications that Britain will be scaling down its concern over climate change. I would be obliged if you would let me know whether this is true or not.

I quote from the Conservative Party manifesto of 2015: "We will push for a strong global climate deal later this year - one that keeps the goal of limiting global warming to two degrees firmly in reach. At home, we will continue to support the UK Climate Change Act"; also "We will work to prevent climate change and assist the poorest in adapting to it". How does scaling down concern over climate change align with these pledges?

As I'm sure you are aware, limiting warming to two degrees is already something of a stretch target; and because of the long residence times of most greenhouse gases in the atmosphere any lessening of GHG reduction has a ratcheting effect on global temperatures.

This apparent new stance would suggest that in trying to lessen the disaster that will be Brexit the government is now content also to wreck the environment for future generations.

Yours sincerely

Richard Bawden

To Diesel or not to Diesel

This post comes with a health warning - one of our cars is diesel-engined, albeit Euro6 standard - so look out for bias in what follows.

There is no doubt that NOx levels in urban environments are excessive and that much of the blame lies at the wheels (or, more accurately, tail-pipes) of diesel-engined vehicles. Now Sadiq Khan has announced plans to tackle this issue in London at least. Justified? Yes, I believe so, although a switch back to petrol-powered vehicles may well exacerbate CO2 problems.

What hasn't been helpful is the vague statement by the prime minister that drivers of diesel-engined vehicles may be "compensated". If she means a scrappage scheme - all well and good - especially if the onward purchase is very carefully defined in terms of all polluting emissions. What would be stupid would be to enact some sort of monetary feed-back that ensured diesel-powered vehicle stay on the road for longer.

Facts Not Opinions

We are in the habit of attending several performances at Shakespeare's Globe Theatre and the Sam Wanamaker Playhouse each year. It is our normal routine to walk from Waterloo Station to the theatres, a walk which takes us past 99 Southwark Street, the site of the Kirkaldy Testing Museum. Above the entrance to the museum is the motto "Facts, Not Opinions".

The machines housed in the museum were used to test all manner of construction materials, so creating de facto standards for such materials whereby engineers could know their strengths, not just guesstimate them. In these days of "post fact truth" this is, perhaps, a museum that should be visited regularly by every politician in the land. They then might appreciate what every engineer knows: if you let opinions take the place of facts whatever you build is liable to fall down.