Time to leave the country?

Ok now I'm starting to really wonder what Gordon Brown and his cronies are up to. My building society stated on their website this morning that they are reducing my ISA interest rate to 0.5% with effect of 4 days ago, great notice period I thought. Then at noon topday the 5th March the Bank of England announce that they are againcutting the interest rates to 0.5% so what now for my saving in my Isa 0.25% or nothing/no incentive to save or maybe they may charge me soon for the priviledge of being a good steward and being careful with my money not foolish like those who caused this crisis.

So what benefit do I get for being careful, living within my means, no running up ridiculous debt I could never pay. Well none it seems Mr Brown is happy to take from the careful and give to the foolish, for a vicars son he doesn't pay much attention to advice given in the gospels. I fixed my mortgage earlier in the year at a rate I knew I would be able to pay and didn't borrow more than I needed less than 3 times of the combined salary of my wife and I the fixed rate was 5.63%. So know I am losing out on two fronts my savings are not earning any interest and I am paying at least 2-3% over the going rate. I'm wondering when the stupidity will cease it was low interest rates that got the UK into this mess in the first with people borrowing more than 5 or 6 times their salary. The only people that are benefiting from this ridiculously low interest rate are those who borrowed 95 or 100% of the value of their homes that can now not remortgage and are therefore on standard variable rates those that were foolish with theior money are now being rewarded why?

This is wrong, the government seem unwilling to recognise that not only the banking system was wrong but the whole nature of a spend spend spend society the banks, the credit card companies, the retail sector and the foolish and greedy members of the british public are to blame for this mess so the Prime Minister wants to help them out instead of letting them learn from their lesson he punishes those that were careful in order to help those that were plain stupid.

Well its going to back fire there will be another RUN ON THE BANKS, I have just removed all my savings and on the way in and way out I saw many other clutching their savings books to do the same, so the money will no longer be with the banks to lend to the foolish or even the aspiring home owner who may have been meticulously saving up a deposit for their first home only to be thwarted by the Bank of England's so called economic progress. In Britian approximately two thirds save whilst a third don't so the government has disadvantaged the majority. So what will we do with the saving well not what the government hopes we are wise people we aren't going to buy new cars, t.v's or sofas, some may spend it on the house mine will go on new windows we badly need them, others with more money may buy a cheap property abroad well done Mr Brown the money has gone out of the country. What we aren't going to do is spend Britian out of the reccession, unwise spending and borrowing caused this problem in the first place and is never going to cure it. Spending will only move the problem further downstream it will catch up eventually.

So what now well after seeing the chaos unfold, I am even more closer to annoucing plans to emigrate once I finish my PhD. Canada isn't in an economic mess and even though America has partially caused this they are willing to learn from it and take appropriate action, lending to the industries that employ people but on the condition they produce greener goods an example is the american automotive industry, there is also talk of taking some of the bankers that caused this to trial not rewarding them with 700K a year pension Mr Brown. Even Europe has got some good ideas like Germany's policy to give people £2500 off new cars if the scrap an old one, giving two benefits, keeping people in work and improving emmissions for the environment. This would be far cheaper than buying all the banks, its not a game of Monopoly Mr Brown, I don't want my tax money or my wifes taxes paying some fat cat, his ridiculous pension for being a prat and allowing unscrupulous lending to people that could never pay.

On the matter of tax as well, I no longer pay now that I am doing a PhD but my wife does and as she is self employed its a bit of a pain but she paid it on time. However due to a cock up on the inland revenue's part they sent her a bill for some under paid tax quite a small amaount, it was dated the 16th feb but didn't arrived till the 4th of March with a threat that if it wasn't paid by the 28th of feb she will be charged a 5% surcharge. They refuse to remove this despite the fact that we didn't recicev the billtill a week after the date of final payment. Yet another example of the government screwing the hard working British public.

Infuriated with the British Government

I am amazed frankly at their stupidity now, how they can't see that this will only put them in a worse light. The decision announced today is the most hypocritical so far. They are taxing the British motorist everywhere they can on the fuel 60% of what we pay is tax and they have increased the car taxation bands drastically charging more for cars that emit higher C02 emissions the larger cars have gone from £180 a yr to £440 and my wife’s tiny 1.25lt fiesta from £120 a yr to £145.

Yet today they announce that plans for a 3rd runway at one of the world’s largest airports Heathrow are approved. How can they support the environmental argument for the taxes the motorist pay suggesting when they pass this new runway to substantially increase aviation in the UK? Cars run on roads some on the CO2 they produce has the opportunity to be absorbed by trees and plants therefore and larger deposits or carbon fall on the roads. Planes fly in the stratosphere they only place that the emissions they produce therefore can go is into the atmosphere further contributing to global warming. They must be either extremely ignorant or stupid not to realise this. Planes may produce less CO2 than the nation of motorists do but the impact is so much greater because of the altitude at which they fly.

Further to this how do they expect to reach the reduction in CO2 targets that they have set now, its sheer lunacy. My other accusations at the government in this blog can be excused somewhat on the fact that it requires some in depth research to discover the paradoxes they can pose. This abomination however cannot, it is a clear cut case and even if they lay on more trains to the 3rd runway as they promise they are never going to counteract the damage they are doing, to the environment and themselves. As much as I have always voted and loyally supported labour this hypocrisy cannot be ignored this is one step too far they have infuriated the British public for too long.

The argument would be that this will create jobs but hello Mr Brown who is flying in a recession anyway, isn't this, another waste of money, to add to the Olympics which is of course also not going to help meeting our CO2 level targets?

Does Global Recession = Consumption Recession?

I hope so.
No really its an interesting question, which would deserve several PhD studies of its own. If the global recession hits peoples spending power by the amount that it has in the last few months in the UK. Could it bring about a sustained or a least temporary drop in consumption.

Could and would people stop just replacing products because there is a new one available that has newer features? Would people once again treasure their old CRT TV’s and stop replacing them with the environmentally destructive LCD types (see earlier post energy efficiency or governmental deficiency) that don't last anywhere near as long. Would municipal recycling centres see a decline in the amount of products (many still working) being thrown away each week. Could we ever become a society again that sees benefits in repairing products rather than disposing of them. Or cherishing products that last a long time and caring for them in order to further extend their life, rather than despairing at an older product because it is now the wrong colour or does match a new appliance.

Could we return even partially to the consumer attitudes pre 1960's plastics mass production boom, before the days of built in obsolescence and the disposable society. A society that invests in products expecting them to last half a life time like my old iron.

I really do think that in order to significantly reduce the environmental impact that we are creating we really need to go backwards rather than forwards. Perhaps this recession is the opportunity we all need to significantly change our attitudes. Perhaps even during this down turn a product service sector may become a stronger possibility with consumers renting rather than buying appliances to allow for them to be returned to the OEM at the end of life for remanufacturing, well we can only hope

Yes this may appear insensitive with the current rate of redundancies being announced each day in the UK. But if we could go back to a time of repairing and maintaining products or offer product service sectors this will create a lot more jobs in each home country rather than the far east.

However I doubt it is even on the governments consideration list as they hand the greedy and incompetent banks more of ours the tax payers money today whilst the interest rates have again been lowered punishing those who were careful enough to save rather than contributing to this over consumption disaster in the first place. I probably should stop ranting about the government though soon as I've decided when I finish my PhD I'm going to do something about this mess and apply for a civil service position hopefully in the strategy board to influence government policy. But we will see...

Don’t buy Plastic products

Well I’m becoming even more concerned at the state of ecological thinking. As I previously wrote in Paradoxes in Sustainable Product Design Life Cycle Analysis LCA would prefer a plastic kettle over a Stainless steel kettle despite the disadvantages of plastics that I listed.

However after a little more reading I realise that it isn’t just the difficulty in keeping the plastic uncontaminated with other types of plastic in recycling that is the issue this is rather a guise. The real issue is the chemical makeup or plastic which is not really suitable for continued reuse the chemical bonds break down so that even if the plastics is separated meticulously into the different types, the resulting recycled plastic is likely to not be as mechanically strong it will lose some of its properties in reprocessing. Coupled to this the effect that UV light has on plastics and you will start to realise that a 10 year old television’s plastic casing is no longer very desirable except in a down cycling stage where it may be used to make a kerb stone or turned into a recycling bin.

You may ask what the problem with down cycling is, well its that this plastic should be reused in another T.V. otherwise the new T.V. needs to have more oil extracted from the ground and processed into new virgin plastic. Oil that we are running very short of and extraction and processing of which adds to the environmental problems.

Plastics are in terms of materials fairly new the plastics revolution erupted in the 1960’s with cheaper disposable goods feeding the affluent baby booming generations that prospered after the struggles of their parents throughout the 1940 and 1950’s due to second world war rationing. Plastics enable new organic shapes to be produced in bright vibrant colours, products were cheaper and fashions started to change more frequently. The advent of mass produced plastics mean that more people could move with the times and follow the design movements of the day unlike post war styles such as Art Nouveau and Deco which were restricted to the upper classes.

The problem is that cheaper products mean that people consume more, cheaper products mean that more of them can be bought, more plastic consumed. Product life spans have tumbled, my grandmother owned an electric iron from the early 1960’s it was given to my mother when ours broke and used right up until the mid 1990’s in fact it still works today except the technology has improved so it is no longer used. But modern irons last between 3 and 5 years from my experience, the technology isn’t the reason for this monumental drop in life expectancy, they aren’t made to last any longer. It’s down to cost people want cheap products and don’t get them repaired it is cheaper on the pocket to buy a new one. But not on the environment…..

Energy efficiency or Governmental intellect deficiency

Why such a focus on the reduction of Carbon Dioxide and CO² as the main environmental agenda. Measurable targets are not the way the environmental agenda should be going because it results in only a small number of areas being focussed upon at the expense of others.

Such is the case in the reduction of carbon dioxide or CO², which will only be replaced by other problematic emissions perhaps worse than CO² for the environment. This is already happening through the strivings to reduce CO², as energy efficiency has become the main buzz word. However its intentions are not as transparent, clean and pure as they may first appear.

Perfectly good usable products are being scrapped because they are supposedly high energy consuming, for example CRT TV’s. Which are being rapidly replaced by LCD screens, which are being driven ahead of their technological improvements by the exaggerated claims that they are energy efficient. However one of the by products in the production of LCD modules is nitrogen trifluoride, an agent that is a formidable greenhouse gas. It’s been calculated that it is 17,000 times as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide and is increasing at an alarming rate in the atmosphere. See the following on this finding in the guardian and new scientist.

How then can their claims be justified, this premise of energy efficiency is not green technology it is far from it. By buying a LCD TV or monitor you are making a substantial contribution to greenhouse gas far greater than a lifetime of CO² from an inefficient traditional CRT TV set.

The automotive industry has also gone silly over reducing CO² because the government are now taxing it. But they are ignoring and actually contributing to the problems that have been associated with Diesel cars for years (of which sales are now rapidly increasing because of low CO² emissions). Such as the link to the causes of asthma and severe respiratory conditions as well as smog in many cities. See the following for details: America Lung Association

Energy efficiency as a green agenda is no more than a misleading headline, a buzz word that may have well been invented by a tabloid newspaper for all the paradox’s, lies and misleading truths behind it. Energy efficiency was the reason that CFC’s were put into refrigerators’ all those years ago, which significantly contributed to the hole in the ozone layer.

I’d rather efforts were focussed on producing energy from sources that don’t produce CO², then it wouldn’t matter really how much energy you used. The problem with this solution is that it requires industry and the government to do something themselves, other than finding more ways to extort money out of their citizens through ridiculous claims and guilt trips about the environment.

The reason energy efficiency is chosen as a focus is because it pays. People go and buy new products they don’t need in order to do their bit, replacing perfectly good products that are then sent to landfill. This attitude only helps the greedy industrialists become richer and the treasury coffers swell due too CO² taxes. Of course government could argue that it is also creating jobs when really it only employs a few shop assistants and a couple of overworked civil servants. As these new energy efficient products are most probably manufactured in China, in an extremely energy inefficient factory, with serious working practise violations and suspect waste disposal into the local environment. But let’s just keep those wheels of industry turning and not ask those difficult questions hey.

Paradoxes in Sustainable Product Design

LCA is the commonly used tool in industry to assess products that are already designed and often in production. It highlights areas where the product has a high environmental impact based on categories such as extration of raw materials, processing, transportation, energy in use and end of life.

However is LCA just confirming what the producers want confirmed, allowing manufacturers to carry on with unsustainable practise and a seemingly clean concience because they have consulted LCA software. Also what is the purpose of analysing something when its already in or about to enter production, surely the damage has been done or development time already been wasted.

Consider this plastic would be the preferable material over stainless steel for manufacturing a kettle if LCA is consulted for the following reasons:

1. Plastic is a better insulator than Stainless Steel so the water would retain heat for longer.


2. Plastic has a lower density than Stainless Steel meaning that the product would be lighter and therefore use less fuel to transport


3. Less energy would be used in production due to less operations and a more maleable/mouldable material.

However here are reasons why I consider that a stainless steel kettle would be prefered

1. Metal is far easier and is therefore more likely to be recycled than plastic. In fact the inherent value of stainless steel will make it very likely that the metal will be recycled to a high quality allowing for reuse in a quality product and with a high percentage of metal return.


2. A stainless steel kettle generally has a timeless classic style which combined with additional durability would give the product a much longer lifespan that its plastic equivalent. Perhaps even three or more times, when I was a child my family had a classic Russell Hobbs K12 kettle for over 15 years. It was servicable as so had the element and switch replaced once during this period. Therefore if you factor in the consumer attachement to a more aesthetic stainless steel kettle you can compare it to the production of a least two plastic equivalents if not more in its lifetime.

The problem here is that LCA doesn't work on the basis of the lifecycle of the product in durability or the material and so doesn't account for the fact that the steel could be recycled many times with little loss in quality or strength.

So now some reasons why plastics shouldn't be used:

1. Plastics leach chemicals and small particles into water and over time this will increase encouraged by the heat and UV degradation of the plastic. Leading tio health concerns for the user in the long term.


2. Fumes produced in the processing of plastics and the injection moulding process are not only harmful to the environment but a severe concern for the workers especially in less developed countries with questionable health and safety measures and no accountability. Workers health could suffer in the long term with severe respiratory and skin complaints
3. Also why should the water remain hotter for longer its a kettle not a boiler, surely this only encourages unsustainable behaviour, the user should be encouraged to only boil what is needed.

So much for LCA it is in my view significantly flawed, and so you might ask how does this example of the kettle benefit the manufacturer. Well plastic is very cheap, products can be mass produced cheaply, with limited life-cycles, which will ensure the greatest revenue in the long term especially if a customer buys 2 0r 3 plastic kettles for every stainless steel kettle they may have previously bought. The disposable society we live in wasn't built on stainless steel kettles but with advent of thermoplastics in the early 1960's.

One thought to finish this rant what is plastic made from oil we really could do with reducing our dependance on that as yes it is used in the extraction and processing of Iron ore into steel but if this is recycled efficiently it will cut out the extraction stage next time round making for a much more efficiently produced product.

Cradle to Cradle

An approach suggested by the authors of this book Cradle to Cradle - remaking the way we make things by William McDonough & Michael Braungart. This book is very interesting if a first a bit depressing you get over the state of the world and start to thing possibilities. It basically describes the way (nature American book) the environment manages resources. They call this approach cradle to cradle to express how resources and nutrients are continually recycled endlessly without any loss in quality and to the continued benefit of the ecosystems around them. They describe the human model as cradle to grave, we extract resources and use the resource them bury it in landfill where it cannot be reused or reclaimed. If we recycle, which we rarely do we don't take the time to seperate the materials or cannot because they weren't designed to be seperated. So the materials are recycled into lower quality forms of themselves because of contaimination with other materials. Thus making the recycled material unsatisfactory for use again in the initial product and so what they call downcycling to a lower quality product i.e. a water bottle becomes a speed hump or flower pot.

They suggest that current attempts therefore are not sufficient they are less bad but still ultimately no good because the resources are lost to landfill eventually and more resources then need to be extracted. they propose that poroducts should be designed in such a way that materials can be continually reclaimed at the end of life and reused for the same purpose. Negating the need to extract new materials from the earth and continually cycling those already in use with zero waste.

Its very interesting but in order to be fully realised needs a complete change in the way society and industry things and works. However it has inspired some companies to follow their advice and produce products that enable cradle to cradle lifecycles.

The problem though is one of logistics how can we ensure that these products are reused in the way the company intends. I can't speak for America but the recycling capability in Leicester a large british city is largely out dated, even though Leicester was britians first environmental city? Yes we have different waste collections but for only two types of plastic, paper, glass and I know the metal items are removed magnetically from the other rubbish. But what about the other 7 types of packaging plastic, what about cardboard, and what about plastic consumer goods at the end of life if I take them to the tip they all just go in one big skip labelled electrical.

The recycling infrastructure really needs an overhaul otherwise all the Sustainable Design going on is going to waste.

Your thoughts as usual please.....

New Beginnings

To any that have followed 'Thoughts, Theories and Omissions' in the past both of you lol. I have finally left secondary school teaching, so the good news is I will stop moaning about it and questioning my purpose in it all.

Except I still dream about school, which is concerning considering I left teaching in July. So I haven't quite put it behind me, but do us ex teachers ever? A question perhaps for discussion by ex-teachers those that fit into the statistic of '30% that leave within the first 5 years of teaching' according to the TTA.

Anyway back to the point I am now undertaking a PhD at Loughborough University my initial proposal not necessarily what I will definitely stick with though is:

'Intergrating Sustainable Design criteria through KBE (CAD)'

So I may be asking for your advice and guidance, if you are a Industrial/Product/Furniture/Transport Designer/Design Engineer, you get the idea.

Obviously this subject will be reflected in most my posts now but I will still try to include my personal thoughts. Which is a good point to tell you all that in the 18 months since I wrote I got married 22nd March 2008, I can recommend it : ).

The New Year

Monday, January 01, 2007

As Death Cab for Cutie put it:

'So this is the new year.
And I don't feel any different.
The clanking of crystal
Explosions off in the distance (in the distance).

So this is the new year
And I have no resolutions
For self assigned penance
For problems with easy solutions.' - The New Year

But it is exciting, when stuff ends its exciting to see what begins and last night despite looking back at a fairly difficult year. I was surrounded by great friends who genuinely care about me and have supported me though the tough times.

So basically thanks you guy's rock! and Matt who wasn't there last night but deserves a award for putting up with me as a housemate over the last 12 months.

Matthew

P.S. I know this is short but collecting big thoughts at the moment and will blog when I have a resolution of what God is doing and my head is thinking - Cryptic.

A Traditional Stressful Christmas

Saturday, December 16, 2006

So who's anticipating a traditional stressful Christmas, just like the first Christmas, yes you read that right. So I have bought very few presents, have school reports to write, a 240 mile round trip to drive and too endure all the family arguments that erupt after the blessed day when we realise it is bad idea to spend too much time together.

But isn't this just how it's meant to be, lets put away the cosy primary school nativity scenes and reflect on the true story, having just travelled for days. Mary heavily pregnant on a donkey Joseph walking alongside they get to their hometown for the compulsory government census. Joseph is your typical guy he wants to provide the best for his girl and is feeling pretty confident that God is in the situation after the angel's promises.

Only to find that he can't blag a room at the best hotel or even the rundown inn, his feeling a bit emasculated, annoyed, frustrated and probably angry, especially when his pride has too accept a stable. He doesn't even want to look at Mary's face as his heard her disappointment all too well already; after all if he had walked more quickly they may have got their quicker.

So the slightly bemused couple settle down for the night with some inquisitive animals who didn't expect to be sharing their quarters. Then low and behold the baby comes. Joseph is being a typical bloke and so tries to help by examining the strength of the manger (he is a carpenter after all!) as Mary struggles on her own to give birth.

Then shepherds come to visit, spending all day with sheep, means they are probably a bit socially inept and difficult to talk too, bringing yet another animal to share the cosy sleeping quarters fantastic. I think I have a good idea of how the conversation between God and I would have been at this point, it bit like 'what are you doing, is this meant to be funny?' Prehaps the shepherds could be seen as the example for trying to get on with extended and/or estranged family members.

Then there is the other side of the long journey, Mary and Joseph have already travelled far. But the wise men, travelled for months on camels. This puts my little planned journey in a comfortable heated car this year in context I suppose; maps and road signs are after all easier to follow than stars. Even last years horrid train journey, which lasted over 8 hrs because every train broke down, seems minor in comparison.

Then there are the presents, now Mary may have known her new born son's (the messiah's) eventual fate, but to be brought Myrrh an embalming lotion was a bit tactless and probably not very exciting, the gold would have been well received I'm sure though.

But throughout all this, stress, disappointment and awkwardness I'm sure their minds and fears were calmed by the ultimate truth of the first Christmas, which is why we endure everything else to celebrate it still.

The presence of God on Earth, Amen.

Life is mundane

Thursday, December 07, 2006

Well it is, I always want to know the answers to what's next until I get them then I wish I didn't know. Because not knowing is generally more exciting. Its the wait, the anticipation that has been exciting at the moment.
Just to clarify if you hadn't worked it out yet I didn't get the job in Bristol, whether I wanted it or not is probably irrelevant, its the fact that whilst I was waiting and stressing it was exciting. If I had got it I would still be excited but very stressed, but the excitement would be the potential of change.
'I like variety' was one of the random answers I gave in the interview but it sums it all up so well. Variety truely is the spice of life, so maybe I should start a new hobby, but I generally like nature or active things and it's dark outside now and when I go to work and when I come home from work.
But to be honest its not just the job, its a culmination of things. I mean Dave has got a job back in Leics and is coming back and I'm happy but not excited. James maybe coming back as well, God is good to me and I hope James does but I'm not excited. I am however excited for James that he has got a girlfriend recentely (change).
New things maybe, my car was new for a few months but now thats starting to become familiar now, but I am still really thankful for it just to clarify.
The excitement of some of the adventure activities I did this summer was awesome. The most exciting was probably the ziplines though the tree tops 2,000 feet up that rocked but it always comes to an end. Even the one that was 1/2 a mile long, but oh how I enjoyed it.
Dancing in the aisles at the Charlatans gig two weeks ago, I was in my element but it ends and you get sent home.
But do we just live for these highlights in live, well no but we do need to make the most of them. Perhaps I should expound this energy into running down the canal till I drop like I used too, or in the poetry I used to write so much.
This life is so real sometimes but seems so reheased at other times. However I need to make the most of it and having a laugh with the kids today in class was probably the days only highlight but its to be treasured. After all I could be shut in an office on my own for weeks on end doing Research ; )

Picture this

Photography is my new interest having found a very nice lens online for my ancient Zenit-B SLR camera. The camera is a traditional manual type, the type that you can create real Art with, less like the automatic digital imagery which produces very good images but lacks the depth, emotion and romance of your traditional 35mm film.

The upside to all this new technolgy is of course though that older stuff is cheaper than ever. But don't get me wrong I also own a simple digital camera as well which is brilliant for quick shots, instant results, size weight and storage. But for those special photos I save the classic SLR to savour the moment and create something special.

Its like putting on a classic vinyl album on the record deck, with the slight hissing, gentle scratching and movement o the belt. Yet it is the time to take and savour the music to step out of the fast come and go digital culture. To wait, to prepare and anticipate, patience is a virtue, when expectation resides.

But as fewer share the love of traditional photography over, to be fair the ease and simplicity of the new digital format. I wonder whether the true image may be soon lost from the solutions paper and developing time.

Initial Blogger

Im currentely writing a Paper on e-learning and a short section on blogging. Interesting concept, we will see how this develops......................................