Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>

My report said

1) My home, for heating and hot water is 20% below the national average. And 
so it should be. My house is well insulated and I do not like it too warm.

2) My appliances create 2 times the national average of CO2 (I doubt that. I 
have no TV, one computer on 24/7, CCTV on 24/7 and I use the washing 
machine, dishwasher, cooker when needed)

3) my travel footprint is 3 times the national average. I also doubt that.

The action plan Action CO2 gave me is crap.

a) fit draught-proofing around doors and window.

Why? All my exterior doors and windows are double-glazed.

b) Install underfloor insulation

Nice, but I have concrete floors. ActionCO2 never asked about my floors 
before suggesting that.

c) Replace your fridge and freezer with a more efficient model

Will that help?

My fridge is 3 years old and is A rated, my freezer is a little older, maybe 
6 years old. It is second hand (my Grandad gave it to me) and I think it is 
B rated. Will rushing out to but a new A+++ rated freezer save on CO2 
emissions. I cannot see the total CO2 emissions on the manufacture of a new 
freezer plus the CO2 costs of disposing of the old recycled freezer will 
have a pay back of less than 10 years.

d) In dry weather use an outside line rather than your dyer

I did tick the box that said I did that already. I tend to use the drier 
when it is raining, but then only when needed eg I wash all my work clothes 
in one wash on a Friday night. 5 Tshirts or jumpers and 3 pairs of trousers. 
If I need a pair of work clothes for Saturday morning I might need the 
dryer. Even then I only dry one pair in it.

e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest CO2 
model in its category

Yes but a 1.7D van is almost certainly a 1.7D van. There is not much to 
choose from.

f) Whenever possible, walk, bike, car share, or use public transport

I do walk to the local shops if just for fags or beer etc. Even better is 
the short cut. If I enter the Kings Head by the side door and leave via the 
front door I save 20 metres by cutting a corner out. It takes a little 
longer timewise but it is worth it. I do drive to do the weekly shop even 
though the local supermarket is less than a mile away. Who can pick up a 
full weekly shopping basket with just two arms? Diet coke and cat food are 
rather bulky.

I cannot use public transport to get to work and back as I have a large 
collection of tools, cables etc that I need for work. I think the bus driver 
would complain if it took me 20 minutes to get on board the bus. And buses 
do not have roof bars for my ladders.

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

Adam

ARWadworth coughed up some electrons that declared:

> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
> 
> I just tried out
> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
> 
> My report said
> 
> 1) My home, for heating and hot water is 20% below the national average.
> And so it should be. My house is well insulated and I do not like it too
> warm.
> 
> 2) My appliances create 2 times the national average of CO2 (I doubt that.
> I have no TV, one computer on 24/7, CCTV on 24/7 and I use the washing
> machine, dishwasher, cooker when needed)
> 
> 3) my travel footprint is 3 times the national average. I also doubt that.
> 
> The action plan Action CO2 gave me is crap.
> 
> a) fit draught-proofing around doors and window.
> 
> Why? All my exterior doors and windows are double-glazed.
> 
> b) Install underfloor insulation
> 
> Nice, but I have concrete floors. ActionCO2 never asked about my floors
> before suggesting that.
> 
> c) Replace your fridge and freezer with a more efficient model
> 
> Will that help?
> 
> My fridge is 3 years old and is A rated, my freezer is a little older,
> maybe 6 years old. It is second hand (my Grandad gave it to me) and I
> think it is B rated. Will rushing out to but a new A+++ rated freezer save
> on CO2 emissions. I cannot see the total CO2 emissions on the manufacture
> of a new freezer plus the CO2 costs of disposing of the old recycled
> freezer will have a pay back of less than 10 years.
> 
> d) In dry weather use an outside line rather than your dyer
> 
> I did tick the box that said I did that already. I tend to use the drier
> when it is raining, but then only when needed eg I wash all my work
> clothes in one wash on a Friday night. 5 Tshirts or jumpers and 3 pairs of
> trousers. If I need a pair of work clothes for Saturday morning I might
> need the dryer. Even then I only dry one pair in it.
> 
> e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest
> CO2 model in its category
> 
> Yes but a 1.7D van is almost certainly a 1.7D van. There is not much to
> choose from.
> 
> f) Whenever possible, walk, bike, car share, or use public transport
> 
> I do walk to the local shops if just for fags or beer etc. Even better is
> the short cut. If I enter the Kings Head by the side door and leave via
> the front door I save 20 metres by cutting a corner out. It takes a little
> longer timewise but it is worth it. I do drive to do the weekly shop even
> though the local supermarket is less than a mile away. Who can pick up a
> full weekly shopping basket with just two arms? Diet coke and cat food are
> rather bulky.
> 
> I cannot use public transport to get to work and back as I have a large
> collection of tools, cables etc that I need for work. I think the bus
> driver would complain if it took me 20 minutes to get on board the bus.
> And buses do not have roof bars for my ladders.
> 
> So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.
> 
> Adam

Just had a "discussion" with SWMBO concerning "the new religion". I hate
having crap shoved down my throat by self-righteous zealots as much as the
next (wo)man and I really think this is where we are at with green issues.
People should be shown what is worthwhile doing with good factual
illustrations, not force fed the fad of the day with nothing to back it up.

My daughter is being taught to recycle at school, which, at here age, I
aplaude. But I tried a little though experiment on her (she's 4). I showed
her a package from Tescos. It was a little cardboard box of pills encased
in a plastic "clam shell". I cut off the clam shell and asked her what she
thought about it. Reply: "Recycle it Daddy". I said "good", "but how about
if it wasn't made in the first place?" "Carboard comes from trees and you
can grow new trees, but plastic is made from oil which is a precious
resource which cannot readily be regenerated". "Why did they put a nice
little cardboard box that worked perfectly well in a silly plastic shell
whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before I chuck it in the bin?"

I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
trouble if she does ;->

Cheers

Tim

--

Anti FUD, not anti-environment

> I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
> them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
> making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
> trouble if she does ;->
>
> Cheers
>
> Tim
>
> --
>
> Anti FUD, not anti-environment

Are you saying that the benefits of recycling are overstated (re.
"good factual illustrations"), or that it's better not to produce the
stuff in the first place, or both?

I agree that it's better not to spend energy producing unnecessary
stuff, but recycling is a pragmatic thing, isn't it? At least, I
assume that persuading people to do without stuff is a lot harder than
persuading them to dispose of it in a different way.

"ARWadworth"  wrote in message 
news:nNazk.57600$E41.26310@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>
> I just tried out 
> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>
> My report said
>

Well oddly enough mine said the same.  We never go on holiday so never fly 
and my car is a clio - so small is its middle name . The  clobber me on my 
home yet its double glazed, insulated  to the  hilt ( not underfloor 
heating - not feasable)  and still it seems I am above the national average 
on usage ( and lets not count right now my faulty heaters which havent been 
on for yonks so I have no heating in the house and am only using a few units 
a day energy.

I use my dishwasher three times a week. I use my washing machine once a week 
and my dryer only when I have to ( rarely). I have no appliances  other than 
a TV and a computer ( one of each which are off more than on.

Despite all of this my home ( 2 bed bungalow) comes out at above the 
national average even though my appliances are using less than half the 
national average  according to them.

Its total bollocks. I have to save and bring my foot pront down to 7 tons 
even though I am already below the national average by their own 
calculations.

I am inclined to use a little more and tell them to boil their heads.
>
> I cannot use public transport to get to work and back as I have a large 
> collection of tools, cables etc that I need for work. I think the bus 
> driver would complain if it took me 20 minutes to get on board the bus. 
> And buses do not have roof bars for my ladders.

Neither can I. There is no public transport where I live.  I would have to 
walk five miles to get to a bus or train with all my things every morning. 
They are simply not being realisitic.
I suppose they want everyone to work from home at being a web designer so 
they dont have to go out. is that it?
>
> So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

yes absolutely.

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:11:14 UTC, "endymion" 
 wrote:

> Despite all of this my home ( 2 bed bungalow) comes out at above the 
> national average even though my appliances are using less than half the 
> national average  according to them.
> 
> Its total bollocks. I have to save and bring my foot pront down to 7 tons 
> even though I am already below the national average by their own 
> calculations.

Typical case of lying with statistics! Not sure if this was mentioned 
recently here, but anyway:

  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7581120.stm

I particularly like the (true) statement that most people have an above 
average number of feet!

-- 
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
   http://www.diybanter.com

"Bob Eager"  wrote in message 
news:176uZD2KcidF-pn2-H3vrtg0ZfCXZ@rikki.tavi.co.uk...
> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:11:14 UTC, "endymion"
>  wrote:
>
>> Despite all of this my home ( 2 bed bungalow) comes out at above the
>> national average even though my appliances are using less than half the
>> national average  according to them.
>>
>> Its total bollocks. I have to save and bring my foot pront down to 7 tons
>> even though I am already below the national average by their own
>> calculations.
>
> Typical case of lying with statistics! Not sure if this was mentioned
> recently here, but anyway:
>
>  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7581120.stm
>
> I particularly like the (true) statement that most people have an above
> average number of feet!
>
Medians and means.

12 inches is not always a rule.

Adam

ARWadworth wrote:
> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
> I just tried out <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>

Hmm.

"How do you primarily heat your home?"

I don't - I'm too mean to put the heating on, and hardly ever at home 
when I'm awake.

"Do you own any renewable energy generating technologies in your home? 
.. Photovoltaic solar panels

Would one of those little LED garden mushrooms count?

"Home insulation"

I assume I have loft and underfloor insulation, as I'm in a middle floor 
flat.

"How much water do you boil to make a single cup of tea?"

Full kettle - I have a half-litre (and a 1-litre, though I rarely use 
that) mug, and I want to rinse and pre-heat it before filling. But I 
don't rinse it under the hot tap.

"washing machine - washes per week"

Answer less than 1 not possible.

"personal computer - how many desktops"

Answer more than 3 not possible

Your target footprint total is 2.45 tonnes per year.
The national average total is 9.96 tonnes per year.

That's nice. Now for the suggestions:

"Turn your thermostat down by 1 degree and save 10% on your bill
... We recommend aiming for around 19-20 degrees celsius in your living 
room and around 18 degrees celsius in your bedroom."

Anything above 16degC in the bedroom is warm. I don't use heating.

and

"Try to make more use of public transport where possible"

Why would I want to make more use of public transport? If I'm not using 
public transport I'm walking. Surely using less PT would be 'greener'.

Oh, it also wanted me to buy a dishwasher. But to use one of them I'd 
also have to buy more crockery - which would probably come from China.

> Who can pick up a full weekly shopping basket with just two arms? Diet coke and 
> cat food are rather bulky.

You could use a soda-stream and tap water for drinks. Buy a boy rabbit 
and a couple of girl rabbits and you would soon have all the catfood you 
need, plus a way of using up veg leftovers.

> So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

I don't actually care about my "carbon footprint". Who invented the 
ghastly phrase, anyway.

Owain

ARWadworth wrote:
> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>
<snip>
>
> So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.
>
> Adam

It's just told me that I'm producing 25 tonnes of CO2 every year - what a 
crock of shite....that's over 68 Kg of CO2 every day

-- 
Phil L
RSRL Tipster Of The Year 2008

"Owain"  wrote in message 
news:eYKdnTeKpLt2w1DV4p2dnAA@posted.plusnet...
> ARWadworth wrote:
>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>> I just tried out 
>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>

>
> "How much water do you boil to make a single cup of tea?"
>
> Full kettle - I have a half-litre (and a 1-litre, though I rarely use 
> that) mug, and I want to rinse and pre-heat it before filling. But I don't 
> rinse it under the hot tap.

Am I the only person in the world who does not make single cups of tea? I 
make pots of tea . When I make a pot of tea it is so that everyone can  have 
some. I dont make tea for one.

"ARWadworth"  wrote in message 
news:nNazk.57600$E41.26310@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>
> I just tried out 
> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>

Our 2 person household is 7.41 against a national average of 9.96 tonnes per 
year.
Does that give me the right to walk around with my holier than thou nose in 
the air?

How the fuck I am going to get it all into footballs is beyond me though 
TBH.

endymion wrote:
> "Owain"  wrote in message
> news:eYKdnTeKpLt2w1DV4p2dnAA@posted.plusnet...
>> ARWadworth wrote:
>>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>>> I just tried out
>>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>
>>
>> "How much water do you boil to make a single cup of tea?"
>>
>> Full kettle - I have a half-litre (and a 1-litre, though I rarely use
>> that) mug, and I want to rinse and pre-heat it before filling. But I
>> don't rinse it under the hot tap.
>
> Am I the only person in the world who does not make single cups of
> tea? I make pots of tea . When I make a pot of tea it is so that
> everyone can  have some. I dont make tea for one.

So what if only one person wants a cup of tea? - you throw the rest down the 
drain?

I often do this when cooking food - I make enough to feed a dozen people, 
just on the off-chance a coach party should drop by, and if they don't, I 
eat it myself.

-- 
Phil L
RSRL Tipster Of The Year 2008

BlueJohn coughed up some electrons that declared:

>> I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
>> them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
>> making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
>> trouble if she does ;->
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> --
>>
>> Anti FUD, not anti-environment
> 
> Are you saying that the benefits of recycling are overstated (re.
> "good factual illustrations"), or that it's better not to produce the
> stuff in the first place, or both?

The latter to a larger extent. Or to put it another way, recycling is a
pointless exercise comparatively if you're being totally wasteful to start
with. IMHO people should remain aware of the wider picture, and not be
blinkered into a limited course of action, which is what I perceive to be
happening (maybe wrongly) in a larger part of society.

> I agree that it's better not to spend energy producing unnecessary
> stuff, but recycling is a pragmatic thing, isn't it? At least, I
> assume that persuading people to do without stuff is a lot harder than
> persuading them to dispose of it in a different way.

Not quite - in the case of the plastic clam shell, I can see no reason for
it to exist. It's an annoyance to me, the cardboard box it's containing
serves the purpose very well anyway *and* I have to dispose of it. Same goes
for multiple layers of plastic on foodstuffs (sausages are just fine in a
bit of waxed paper, they do NOT require a silly polystyrene tray, cling
film and cardboard wrap).

I'd prefer products to be made to last, the antithesis of the consumerist
society. I'd prefer to telecommute part time, but my employers historically
wouldn't countenance it, despite the job (sysadmin) being eminently suited.

There's lots of things that could be made better for the environment without
giving up stuff, but none of it is quite as easy as banning GLS bulbs from
the government's POV.

Cheers

Tim

"R D S"  wrote in message 
news:6j56mtF1g5d1U1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "ARWadworth"  wrote in message 
> news:nNazk.57600$E41.26310@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>>
>> I just tried out 
>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>

just tried it, we dont drink tea or coffee so never boil a kettle, but i had 
to tell them that i did,
dont have a dishwasher yet told to buy one... because one full load a day is 
better than loads of bowls of hot water!!! one bowl of hot water does all 
our plates (16 piece) and the washing up gets done twice a week,

underfloor insulation again, they never heard of concrete floors i guess,

Since we moved in here, we've had no kitchen as i'm re-doing it, so we have 
no cooker, and are using the microwave for all our meals, yet it tells me to 
use the microwave more because its more efficiant that a conventional 
oven... waht conventional oven, we dont have one.

i'm to turn the thermostat down by one degree... havent bloody got one, 
well, only the one on the combi boiler which senses water temp i believe.

and i'm to walk and use public transport more,
it's a mile walk to the bus stop from my house, having arthritis this is a 
bit far for me to walk, and when i get there it's at least 2 quid to go into 
town,
i can ride the motorbike into town, park for free, and come home for about 
30p's worth of petrol.

I'm going to do another carbon calc for my motorhome next, that'll screw 
things up,
got underfloor insulation.. the entire shell is a sandwich of wood, 
polystyrene and alli,
got solar panels (pv) that produce all the power i need to run everything in 
the van,
i get hot water as i drive along from the coolant loop from the engine to 
the calorifier,
The washing machine in there is an A++ rated one, uses 30 litres of water 
per wash and is fed with warm water using the free hot water from the 
engine, and the electric to run it comes from the batteries, charged up from 
the solar panels of the engines alternator when i'm driving.
The heating is from a diesel fired eberspacher, which also heats the hot 
water calorifier up if needed, uses a max of 1 litre an hour, but only runs 
for about 5 to 7 minutes per 30 minutes to keep the van at 23 degrees C.

I've got a microwave in the van, but using that more means i'd have to run 
the genny or engine to re-charge the batteries, (can use it for 15 minutes a 
day without it affecting the power levels from the solar charge the next 
day)

And i bet it can't handle the fact that whilst i'm producing carbon from 
driving it, at the same time i'm heating the hot water up for showers and 
washing up later on, and producing upto 165 amps of power for re-charging 
the batteries, which means a couple of hours totally re-charges the battery 
bank, where as it takes almost a day on mains hookup using power station 
generatored power.

endymion wrote:
> 
> "Owain"  wrote in message 
> news:eYKdnTeKpLt2w1DV4p2dnAA@posted.plusnet...
>> ARWadworth wrote:
>>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>>> I just tried out 
>>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
> 
>>
>> "How much water do you boil to make a single cup of tea?"
>>
>> Full kettle - I have a half-litre (and a 1-litre, though I rarely use 
>> that) mug, and I want to rinse and pre-heat it before filling. But I 
>> don't rinse it under the hot tap.
> 
> Am I the only person in the world who does not make single cups of tea? 
> I make pots of tea . When I make a pot of tea it is so that everyone 
> can  have some. I dont make tea for one.
> 
I don't make tea.
At all.

"gazz"  wrote in message 
news:6j5atmF1iaufU1@mid.individual.net...

> i'm to turn the thermostat down by one degree... havent bloody got one, 
> well, only the one on the combi boiler which senses water temp i believe.

Well you will save a lot more if you have a proper control system.
Its bad enough that some systems were not fitted with room stats decades 
ago, to not have one on a combi system is poor.
Are you sure you don't have one?

I'm fairly average.  But I did some digging.  It doesn't care how much 
you use the train, your CO2 figure is the same.  All those long distance 
commuters will be pleased.  I imagine the rest is as bad.  After all, 
how much difference does that mobile phone charger really make when I 
forget to unplug it?

Andy

Andy Champ wrote:
> I'm fairly average.  But I did some digging.  It doesn't care how much
> you use the train, your CO2 figure is the same.  All those long
> distance commuters will be pleased.  I imagine the rest is as bad. After 
> all, how much difference does that mobile phone charger really
> make when I forget to unplug it?

The real problem here is that the environmental industry thinks this survey 
is the mutts nuts.  Ergo politicians will accept it as kosher & start making 
short term vote catching policy & tax changes as a result.


-- 
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

In article <48cd3bfe$0$3304$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>,
   Tim S  wrote:
> "Why did they put a nice little cardboard box that worked perfectly well
> in a silly plastic shell whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before
> I chuck it in the bin?"

One reason would be to prevent tampering.

There seems to be a fashion to open up just about anything you can  - and
then not buy it. Or nick something from it.

-- 
*Toilet stolen from police station. Cops have nothing to go on.  

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

ARWadworth wrote:

> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

Not until you mentioned it...

> I just tried out <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>

Yup gave it a whirl...

Apparently we are producing 20 tonnes vs the "average" 16...

> 3) my travel footprint is 3 times the national average. I also doubt that.

It asks if you live in a rural location, then fails to take that into 
account on the journey questions - e.g. like using the car for journeys 
of up to a mile - erm, unless I was visiting a neighbour, that would not 
get me anywhere useful!

> The action plan Action CO2 gave me is crap.

It seems to parrot the same platitudes regardless of what info you give it.

> b) Install underfloor insulation

Yup got that as well. It did not comment on the stone age boiler, but 
did suggest ripping and replacing the fridge!

> save on CO2 emissions. I cannot see the total CO2 emissions on the 
> manufacture of a new freezer plus the CO2 costs of disposing of the old 
> recycled freezer will have a pay back of less than 10 years.

Indeed - something they often seem to ignore.

> e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest 
> CO2 model in its category

Assumes one wants to drive something tiny and slow... I think I would 
rather skip the summer flight to the med! (again)

> So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

I concur...



-- 
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
|          Internode Ltd -  http://www.internode.co.uk            |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|        John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk              |
\=================================================================/

ARWadworth wrote:
> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>
> I just tried out
> http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx

There is a feedback option calculator.feedback@defra.gsi.gov.uk

A few e-mails might get noticed...

If this bollox is going to be accepted as kosher we could at least try to 
get it accurate.



-- 
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

Phil L wrote:
> I often do this when cooking food - I make enough to feed a dozen people, 
> just on the off-chance a coach party should drop by, and if they don't, I 
> eat it myself.

In the one meal? ;-)

It's a sin to waste food, I tell myself as I buy up all the 
reduced-to-10p chocolate cakes at 9pm

Owain

gazz wrote:
> I'm going to do another carbon calc for my motorhome next, that'll screw 
> things up,

Take 200 motorhomes, remove the wheels, and stack 'em up, and you have 
the government's ideal prefabricated environmentally-friendly key worker 
housing solution.

Not the most generously-proportioned or aesthetic of accommodation 
though, and not much room for a sizeable collection of power tools.

Owain

"R D S"  wrote in message 
news:6j56mtF1g5d1U1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "ARWadworth"  wrote in message 
> news:nNazk.57600$E41.26310@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>>
>> I just tried out 
>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>>
>
> Our 2 person household is 7.41 against a national average of 9.96 tonnes 
> per year.
> Does that give me the right to walk around with my holier than thou nose 
> in the air?
>

I am still trying to work out how we use so much quite frankly according to 
them.  Two of us. I run a dishwasher when full - three times a week. Washing 
machine once a week. I cook once a week and microwave the rest of it ( 
dinners that is). One meal a day for two people.

I havent got the heating on right now .  I have one computer on about three 
hours a day. One TV on about two hours a day ( or less week days  - just to 
watch the news).    We dont go on holiday.  Lights are only on in one room 
at night . I do have a night light because I suffer from  congestion ( post 
pneumonia)  and like to be able to get up without fumbling around in the 
dark if I need to. The house is so sealed/insulated  that it has rampant 
condensation right now with the weather as it is!  So much for  insulation.

The only thing I have is a small car to go to work three times a week  and 
shopping on my way home. I cant use public transport, there is none and 
anyway we dont go out that often.

Yet I am supposed to reduce my water heater ( reduce it anymore and it will 
be cold!)  Dry outside ( I do) put under floor heating in. ( no way that can 
be achieved here)  and run a smaller car ( I run a small car).

  I think its fixed. I think they are saying the same for everyone.

"Phil L"  wrote in message 
news:vKdzk.57704$E41.13367@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> endymion wrote:
>> "Owain"  wrote in message
>> news:eYKdnTeKpLt2w1DV4p2dnAA@posted.plusnet...
>>> ARWadworth wrote:
>>>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>>>> I just tried out
>>>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>>
>>>
>>> "How much water do you boil to make a single cup of tea?"
>>>
>>> Full kettle - I have a half-litre (and a 1-litre, though I rarely use
>>> that) mug, and I want to rinse and pre-heat it before filling. But I
>>> don't rinse it under the hot tap.
>>
>> Am I the only person in the world who does not make single cups of
>> tea? I make pots of tea . When I make a pot of tea it is so that
>> everyone can  have some. I dont make tea for one.
>
> So what if only one person wants a cup of tea? - you throw the rest down 
> the drain?
>
Well, there is only two of us, but that never happens. If I make one pot of 
tea it will all get drunk.  One pot of tea = two and a half mugs each . I 
keep the tea pot warm with a cosy.
We are big tea drinkers ( no, I dont value being told about my lifestyle and 
how we should be drinking water, thankyou.) . One pot is more economical in 
fact for us. On boiling of the kettle.

"endymion"  wrote in message 
news:xsadnd-zt_MtcVDVnZ2dnUVZ8uudnZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "R D S"  wrote in message 
> news:6j56mtF1g5d1U1@mid.individual.net...
>>
>> "ARWadworth"  wrote in message 
>> news:nNazk.57600$E41.26310@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>>>
>>> I just tried out 
>>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>>>
>>
>> Our 2 person household is 7.41 against a national average of 9.96 tonnes 
>> per year.
>> Does that give me the right to walk around with my holier than thou nose 
>> in the air?
>>
>
> I am still trying to work out how we use so much quite frankly according 
> to them.  Two of us. I run a dishwasher when full - three times a week. 
> Washing machine once a week. I cook once a week and microwave the rest of 
> it ( dinners that is). One meal a day for two people.
>
I was asked if I had a microwave and nothing else was asked about it. I have 
not used it once this year, so how does that fit into the calculations?

Adam

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> In article <48cd3bfe$0$3304$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>,
>    Tim S  wrote:
>> "Why did they put a nice little cardboard box that worked perfectly well
>> in a silly plastic shell whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before
>> I chuck it in the bin?"
> 
> One reason would be to prevent tampering.
> 
> There seems to be a fashion to open up just about anything you can  - and
> then not buy it. Or nick something from it.
> 
Probably follows the manufacturers' fashion of putting things like these 
(below) on boxes:

Contents may differ from picture
Colour White/Grey/Black/Blue/Red
110-120V 60Hz

Indeed, just the other day, we wished to buy a small roll of cheap 
plastic bags. The box said "small plastic bags" - without any indication 
of actual size. There were around half a dozen opened and/or resealed 
boxes on the shelf. :-)

Mor eseriously, I do agree. There do appear to be more (or more active) 
tamperers/fiddlers/bit nickers.

-- 
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious 
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
<www.thyromind.info> <www.thyroiduk.org> <www.altsupportthyroid.org>

The Medway Handyman wrote:
> ARWadworth wrote:
>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>>
>> I just tried out
>> http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx
> 
> There is a feedback option calculator.feedback@defra.gsi.gov.uk
> 
> A few e-mails might get noticed...
> 
> If this bollox is going to be accepted as kosher we could at least try to 
> get it accurate.
> 
> 
> 
Only bollox of clean animals can be kosher. :-)

Agreed - it is truly dreadful - I would expect better from a junior 
science project.

-- 
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious 
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
<www.thyromind.info> <www.thyroiduk.org> <www.altsupportthyroid.org>

"Dave Plowman (News)"  wrote:

> There seems to be a fashion to open up just about anything you can  - and
> then not buy it. Or nick something from it.

Or poison it. 

-- 
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

"John Rumm"  wrote in message 
news:6oGdnQ2fe9X7PlDVnZ2dnUVZ8vqdnZ2d@posted.plusnet...

>> e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest 
>> CO2 model in its category
>
> Assumes one wants to drive something tiny and slow... I think I would 
> rather skip the summer flight to the med! (again)

I do both.. I don't like the med and I don't need to drive something fast.
>
>> So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.
>
> I concur...

If you saw the figures it came up for me you would know it was cr@p.
I have a carbon foot print of 2.5 tons for a family of three.
Lets see Mary beat that with all her fancy panels and stuff.

Rod wrote:
> Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
>> In article <48cd3bfe$0$3304$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>,
>>    Tim S  wrote:
>>> "Why did they put a nice little cardboard box that worked perfectly well
>>> in a silly plastic shell whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before
>>> I chuck it in the bin?"
>>
>> One reason would be to prevent tampering.
>>
>> There seems to be a fashion to open up just about anything you can  - and
>> then not buy it. Or nick something from it.
>>
> Probably follows the manufacturers' fashion of putting things like these 
> (below) on boxes:
> 
> Contents may differ from picture
> Colour White/Grey/Black/Blue/Red
> 110-120V 60Hz
> 
> Indeed, just the other day, we wished to buy a small roll of cheap 
> plastic bags. The box said "small plastic bags" - without any indication 
> of actual size. There were around half a dozen opened and/or resealed 
> boxes on the shelf. :-)
> 
> Mor eseriously, I do agree. There do appear to be more (or more active) 
> tamperers/fiddlers/bit nickers.
> 
Not surprising when,because of the cost of the packaging, only complete 
kits of anything are for sale. you cant get spare parts.

See my posts a few months back on trying to get a Sunvic RECEIVER or 
even a BOARD for it for a wireless stat.

Owain wrote:
> gazz wrote:
>> I'm going to do another carbon calc for my motorhome next, that'll 
>> screw things up,
> 
> Take 200 motorhomes, remove the wheels, and stack 'em up, and you have 
> the government's ideal prefabricated environmentally-friendly key worker 
> housing solution.
> 

Well that's what they are, most of the year.

> Not the most generously-proportioned or aesthetic of accommodation 
> though, and not much room for a sizeable collection of power tools.
> 

Answer is mobile homes. Ideal entry level accomodation actually.


> Owain
>

endymion wrote:
> 
> "Phil L"  wrote in message 
> news:vKdzk.57704$E41.13367@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> endymion wrote:
>>> "Owain"  wrote in message
>>> news:eYKdnTeKpLt2w1DV4p2dnAA@posted.plusnet...
>>>> ARWadworth wrote:
>>>>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>>>>> I just tried out
>>>>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "How much water do you boil to make a single cup of tea?"
>>>>
>>>> Full kettle - I have a half-litre (and a 1-litre, though I rarely use
>>>> that) mug, and I want to rinse and pre-heat it before filling. But I
>>>> don't rinse it under the hot tap.
>>>
>>> Am I the only person in the world who does not make single cups of
>>> tea? I make pots of tea . When I make a pot of tea it is so that
>>> everyone can  have some. I dont make tea for one.
>>
>> So what if only one person wants a cup of tea? - you throw the rest 
>> down the drain?
>>
> Well, there is only two of us, but that never happens. If I make one pot 
> of tea it will all get drunk.  One pot of tea = two and a half mugs each 
> . I keep the tea pot warm with a cosy.
> We are big tea drinkers ( no, I dont value being told about my lifestyle 
> and how we should be drinking water, thankyou.) . One pot is more 
> economical in fact for us. On boiling of the kettle.

Its all bollox. To reduce carbon footprint, make carbon expensive. Its 
that simple,. People, when faced with huge bills, will naturally find 
out 'what works' to reduce them.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:49:27 +0100, Rod 
wrote:


>Probably follows the manufacturers' fashion of putting things like these 
>(below) on boxes:
>
>Contents may differ from picture
>Colour White/Grey/Black/Blue/Red
>110-120V 60Hz
>
>Indeed, just the other day, we wished to buy a small roll of cheap 
>plastic bags. The box said "small plastic bags" - without any indication 
>of actual size. There were around half a dozen opened and/or resealed 
>boxes on the shelf. :-)
>

Does anybody else have the feeling that the stuff you buy in shops
actually costs approximately nothing, all you are paying for is the
cost of advertising, marketing and sales.

I first came to this conclusion years ago when I saw a pair of Chinese
copy mole grips in the £1.00 bin at the petrol station. It would cost
Ca. £10.00 for me to package and ship an item like that to the next
town 

-and they had come from China.

Derek

In article ,
   Derek Geldard  wrote:
> Does anybody else have the feeling that the stuff you buy in shops
> actually costs approximately nothing, all you are paying for is the
> cost of advertising, marketing and sales.

> I first came to this conclusion years ago when I saw a pair of Chinese
> copy mole grips in the £1.00 bin at the petrol station. It would cost
> Ca. £10.00 for me to package and ship an item like that to the next
> town 

Is that in Harrods gift paper and same day delivery?

UK second class post and a jiffy bag - less than a fiver.

> -and they had come from China.

But likely in a container by sea. Which is extremely cheap.

-- 
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 17:29:50 +0100, Tim S  wrote:

>ARWadworth coughed up some electrons that declared:
>
>> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>> 
>> I just tried out
>> <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>> 
>> My report said
>> 
>> 1) My home, for heating and hot water is 20% below the national average.
>> And so it should be. My house is well insulated and I do not like it too
>> warm.
>> 
>> 2) My appliances create 2 times the national average of CO2 (I doubt that.
>> I have no TV, one computer on 24/7, CCTV on 24/7 and I use the washing
>> machine, dishwasher, cooker when needed)
>> 
>> 3) my travel footprint is 3 times the national average. I also doubt that.
>> 
>> The action plan Action CO2 gave me is crap.
>> 
>> a) fit draught-proofing around doors and window.
>> 
>> Why? All my exterior doors and windows are double-glazed.
>> 
>> b) Install underfloor insulation
>> 
>> Nice, but I have concrete floors. ActionCO2 never asked about my floors
>> before suggesting that.
>> 
>> c) Replace your fridge and freezer with a more efficient model
>> 
>> Will that help?
>> 
>> My fridge is 3 years old and is A rated, my freezer is a little older,
>> maybe 6 years old. It is second hand (my Grandad gave it to me) and I
>> think it is B rated. Will rushing out to but a new A+++ rated freezer save
>> on CO2 emissions. I cannot see the total CO2 emissions on the manufacture
>> of a new freezer plus the CO2 costs of disposing of the old recycled
>> freezer will have a pay back of less than 10 years.
>> 
>> d) In dry weather use an outside line rather than your dyer
>> 
>> I did tick the box that said I did that already. I tend to use the drier
>> when it is raining, but then only when needed eg I wash all my work
>> clothes in one wash on a Friday night. 5 Tshirts or jumpers and 3 pairs of
>> trousers. If I need a pair of work clothes for Saturday morning I might
>> need the dryer. Even then I only dry one pair in it.
>> 
>> e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest
>> CO2 model in its category
>> 
>> Yes but a 1.7D van is almost certainly a 1.7D van. There is not much to
>> choose from.
>> 
>> f) Whenever possible, walk, bike, car share, or use public transport
>> 
>> I do walk to the local shops if just for fags or beer etc. Even better is
>> the short cut. If I enter the Kings Head by the side door and leave via
>> the front door I save 20 metres by cutting a corner out. It takes a little
>> longer timewise but it is worth it. I do drive to do the weekly shop even
>> though the local supermarket is less than a mile away. Who can pick up a
>> full weekly shopping basket with just two arms? Diet coke and cat food are
>> rather bulky.
>> 
>> I cannot use public transport to get to work and back as I have a large
>> collection of tools, cables etc that I need for work. I think the bus
>> driver would complain if it took me 20 minutes to get on board the bus.
>> And buses do not have roof bars for my ladders.
>> 
>> So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.
>> 
>> Adam
>
>Just had a "discussion" with SWMBO concerning "the new religion". I hate
>having crap shoved down my throat by self-righteous zealots as much as the
>next (wo)man and I really think this is where we are at with green issues.
>People should be shown what is worthwhile doing with good factual
>illustrations, not force fed the fad of the day with nothing to back it up.
>
>My daughter is being taught to recycle at school, which, at here age, I
>aplaude. But I tried a little though experiment on her (she's 4). I showed
>her a package from Tescos. It was a little cardboard box of pills encased
>in a plastic "clam shell". I cut off the clam shell and asked her what she
>thought about it. Reply: "Recycle it Daddy". I said "good", "but how about
>if it wasn't made in the first place?" "Carboard comes from trees and you
>can grow new trees, but plastic is made from oil which is a precious
>resource which cannot readily be regenerated". "Why did they put a nice
>little cardboard box that worked perfectly well in a silly plastic shell
>whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before I chuck it in the bin?"
>
>I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
>them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
>making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
>trouble if she does ;->

Many people seem to forget about the 3 "R"s: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.
Recycle is the last of them and should only be there if Reduction or
Reuse is not possible.

IOW: There's much too much emphasis on Recycling.

-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

Derek Geldard wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:49:27 +0100, Rod 
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> Probably follows the manufacturers' fashion of putting things like these 
>> (below) on boxes:
>>
>> Contents may differ from picture
>> Colour White/Grey/Black/Blue/Red
>> 110-120V 60Hz
>>
>> Indeed, just the other day, we wished to buy a small roll of cheap 
>> plastic bags. The box said "small plastic bags" - without any indication 
>> of actual size. There were around half a dozen opened and/or resealed 
>> boxes on the shelf. :-)
>>
> 
> Does anybody else have the feeling that the stuff you buy in shops
> actually costs approximately nothing, all you are paying for is the
> cost of advertising, marketing and sales.
> 

Yes. Its another form of wealth redistribution, characteristic in an 
economy with an excess of cash.


> I first came to this conclusion years ago when I saw a pair of Chinese
> copy mole grips in the £1.00 bin at the petrol station. It would cost
> Ca. £10.00 for me to package and ship an item like that to the next
> town 
> 
> -and they had come from China.
> 

Screw by the kilogram in brown paper bags will come back, for sure..



> Derek
>

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:02:06 +0100 Dave Plowman (News) wrote :
> But likely in a container by sea. Which is extremely cheap.

So it seems: in preparation for emigrating I have just shipped a 
selection of my books (got the number down to 500!!!), DVDs, 70 
souvenir coffee mugs from around the world and some clothes. 16 cartons 
in total. Cost for the removal firm to come to my home, pack 
everything, ship to Melbourne and at the other end deliver and unpack 
was £500. I can't help thinking that sending it all to Manchester would 
have cost more. IIRC the rate for a container load to Australia is no 
more than about £3-4K and that's a lot of almost anything.

-- 
Tony Bryer SDA UK  'Software to build on'  http://www.sda.co.uk

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:01:05 +0100, Derek Geldard
 wrote:

>Does anybody else have the feeling that the stuff you buy in shops
>actually costs approximately nothing, all you are paying for is the
>cost of advertising, marketing and sales.
>
>I first came to this conclusion years ago when I saw a pair of Chinese
>copy mole grips in the £1.00 bin at the petrol station. It would cost
>Ca. £10.00 for me to package and ship an item like that to the next
>town 
>
>-and they had come from China.


There was a bloke on Dragons Den last week demonstrating a very nice
device that detects a bath overflow working and instantly turns both
bath taps off. The point was it was mechanical and no electric
involved. It looked a really good gadget.  Unfortunately he said it
would be made in China for £5 and sold for £60.

In article ,
   EricP  wrote:
> There was a bloke on Dragons Den last week demonstrating a very nice
> device that detects a bath overflow working and instantly turns both
> bath taps off. The point was it was mechanical and no electric
> involved. It looked a really good gadget.  Unfortunately he said it
> would be made in China for £5 and sold for £60.

Blame that on the importers/retailers, then.

-- 
*Forget the Joneses, I keep us up with the Simpsons.

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Tony Bryer wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:02:06 +0100 Dave Plowman (News) wrote :
>> But likely in a container by sea. Which is extremely cheap.
> 
> So it seems: in preparation for emigrating I have just shipped a 
> selection of my books (got the number down to 500!!!), DVDs, 70 
> souvenir coffee mugs from around the world and some clothes. 16 cartons 
> in total. Cost for the removal firm to come to my home, pack 
> everything, ship to Melbourne and at the other end deliver and unpack 
> was £500. I can't help thinking that sending it all to Manchester would 
> have cost more. IIRC the rate for a container load to Australia is no 
> more than about £3-4K and that's a lot of almost anything.
> 
The only time I sent a container, the damn ship ran aground. So I was 
contacted by some never-heard-of insurer asking if they could settle on 
my behalf. Seems they have to go round every single container and 
contact the owner. All I had to do was sign a form and forget about it, 
but was odd at the time.

-- 
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious 
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
<www.thyromind.info> <www.thyroiduk.org> <www.altsupportthyroid.org>

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> Answer is mobile homes. Ideal entry level accomodation actually.

Not sure about that. Single-storey and >5metres between homes means 
they're a ratehr low-density use of land. They seem to combine the worst 
of renting - with no ownership of the underlying plot - with having the 
maintenance costs of a house on a depreciating asset. A lot of parks 
insist you buy a new home or move the old one once it gets to >15 years 
old; they don't want the parks looking shabby.

I was thinking more like http://www.shipping-container-housing.com/

Owain

endymion wrote:
> We are big tea drinkers ( no, I dont value being told about my lifestyle 
> and how we should be drinking water, thankyou.) .

You'd pay a fortune in the shops for bottled water which had been 
treated to reduce harmful bacteria and then had beneficial antioxidants 
added.

Owain

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
> Its all bollox. To reduce carbon footprint, make carbon expensive. Its 
> that simple,. People, when faced with huge bills, will naturally find 
> out 'what works' to reduce them.
> 

How is that going to justify all the civil servants?

They could have done that for fuel, instead of the 16 (or whatever) 
sorts of road tax.

Andy

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:13:14 +0100 Rod wrote :
> The only time I sent a container, the damn ship ran aground.

Thank you for your words of encouragement <g>

-- 
Tony Bryer SDA UK  'Software to build on'  http://www.sda.co.uk

Tony Bryer wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:13:14 +0100 Rod wrote :
>> The only time I sent a container, the damn ship ran aground.
> 
> Thank you for your words of encouragement <g>
> 
Well it was coming to the UK - via Hamburg. Maybe they are better leaving?

-- 
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious 
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
<www.thyromind.info> <www.thyroiduk.org> <www.altsupportthyroid.org>

Andy Champ wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> Its all bollox. To reduce carbon footprint, make carbon expensive. Its 
>> that simple,. People, when faced with huge bills, will naturally find 
>> out 'what works' to reduce them.
>>
> 
> How is that going to justify all the civil servants?
> 
> They could have done that for fuel, instead of the 16 (or whatever) 
> sorts of road tax.
> 
> Andy
Precisely.

In message , Rod 
 writes
>Tony Bryer wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:13:14 +0100 Rod wrote :
>>> The only time I sent a container, the damn ship ran aground.
>>  Thank you for your words of encouragement <g>
>>
>Well it was coming to the UK - via Hamburg. Maybe they are better 
>leaving?
>
Must have been driving on the wrong side - auslaender eh ?

-- 
geoff

In message <sK2dnbtCHoxvdFDVnZ2dnUVZ8szinZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Owain 
 writes
>It's a sin to waste food, I tell myself as I buy up all the 
>reduced-to-10p chocolate cakes at 9pm
You've been watching me... 7.5Kg of yellow sticker strawberries for 30p 
waiting in my freezer for a nice jam making day. I don't talk about the 
chocolate/toffee/whatever puddings, they're hidden in a quiet and rarely 
plundered corner of the freezer waiting for my attention.
>
>Owain
>

-- 
Clint Sharp

ARWadworth wrote:

>So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

...and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.

Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
instead.

However, the dear old Beeb, always keen to support government policies
when they involve raising taxes for spurious reasons like this, showed
a programme on Sunday night(?) that tried to debunk the CO2-debunkers.
It 'answered' the 'sunspot' thing by saying that as sunspot activity
'blew away' the cosmic rays that promote cloud formation (which cools
down the planet), sunspots had nothing to with climate change!

So now we know.....we need to control cosmic rays. New tax, anyone?

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 08:27:44 +0100, Terry Fields wrote:

> ARWadworth wrote:
> 
>>So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.
> 
> ...and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
> 
> Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
> shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
> the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
> instead.
> 
> However, the dear old Beeb, always keen to support government policies
> when they involve raising taxes for spurious reasons like this, showed
> a programme on Sunday night(?) that tried to debunk the CO2-debunkers.
> It 'answered' the 'sunspot' thing by saying that as sunspot activity
> 'blew away' the cosmic rays that promote cloud formation (which cools
> down the planet), sunspots had nothing to with climate change!
> 
> So now we know.....we need to control cosmic rays. New tax, anyone?

Another astronomical tax?

Don.

The message 
from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:

> ....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.

So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistant?

> Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
> shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
> the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
> instead.

If the greenhouse effect is real, and it has been accepted as fact for
over a century, then whether or not CO2 concentrations tend to lag or
lead is an interesting side issue.

There is a rational explanation for the lag, if it really does exist, in
that some of the extra CO2 is expelled from the sea as sea temperatures
rise and the sea is such a huge heat sink that it lags years behind
atmospheric temperature trends. 

-- 
Roger Chapman

"Terry Fields" <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> wrote in message 
news:31nuc454uqf3f6kf6agdtv8ja9unr815ua@4ax.com...
>
> ARWadworth wrote:
>
>>So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.
>
> ...and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
>
> Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
> shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
> the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
> instead.
>
> However, the dear old Beeb, always keen to support government policies
> when they involve raising taxes for spurious reasons like this, showed
> a programme on Sunday night(?) that tried to debunk the CO2-debunkers.
> It 'answered' the 'sunspot' thing by saying that as sunspot activity
> 'blew away' the cosmic rays that promote cloud formation (which cools
> down the planet), sunspots had nothing to with climate change!

Well if they said that then the BBC is talking cr@p.
Cosmic rays are high energy particles that solar wind has no effect on.
The damn things are travelling so fast they penetrate deeply into the 
atmosphere where solar wind doesn't reach.
If that is the basis they are discounting the cosmic ray effect on they need 
to think again.
I will have to get iPlayer out and view the program to see what other lies 
they are telling the gullible.

Roger wrote:
> The message 
> from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:
> 
>> ....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
> 
> So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistant?
> 
>> Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
>> shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
>> the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
>> instead.
> 
> If the greenhouse effect is real, and it has been accepted as fact for
> over a century, then whether or not CO2 concentrations tend to lag or
> lead is an interesting side issue.
> 
> There is a rational explanation for the lag, if it really does exist, in
> that some of the extra CO2 is expelled from the sea as sea temperatures
> rise and the sea is such a huge heat sink that it lags years behind
> atmospheric temperature trends. 
> 
The more frighetning thing is that CO2 appears to be both a cause and an 
effect, of global warming: I.e. you have a nice positive feedback system 
that can 'flip' the climate between a high CO2/low CO2 regime, depending 
on what is stored in the oceans.

Hitherto, its probably been volcanic activity  or sunspot driven: now 
its fossil fuel driven.

There is an interesting balance also between coal burning and warming, 
in that the short term effect of coal burning is to put up particulates 
that cool the atmosphere: its when you stop burning coal because of acid 
rain etc, and fit exhaust catalysers to cars, that you suddenly get a 
rise in temperatures. China is now burning more coal than ever..

The poles are the place that receive the least sunlight, but have the 
same radiation poetntial..they are the heats sinks of the world. 
Reduction in radiation from the poles by CO@ blanketing leads to rapidly 
risng polar temperatures.

We are seeing rapidly rising polar temperatures.

Its probably far far too late to stop CO2 generated global warming though.

What is needed is a way to generate the massive amounts of energy we 
will need to deal with its effects. An that isnt going to be 
photovoltaics or windmills.

On 2008-09-14, ARWadworth  wrote:
> Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

Just did it.

> So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

Yep. Sit in the dark, wearing 2 sweaters and never go anywhere.


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On 2008-09-14, Tim S  wrote:
> BlueJohn coughed up some electrons that declared:
>
>>> I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
>>> them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
>>> making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
>>> trouble if she does ;->
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Anti FUD, not anti-environment
>> 
>> Are you saying that the benefits of recycling are overstated (re.
>> "good factual illustrations"), or that it's better not to produce the
>> stuff in the first place, or both?
>
> The latter to a larger extent. 

That's because the correct mantra is actually "Reduce, Re-use, Recycle". Note
that Recycle comes last.

I'm no greeny, but I hate waste.


-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On 2008-09-15, Tony Bryer  wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:02:06 +0100 Dave Plowman (News) wrote :
>> But likely in a container by sea. Which is extremely cheap.
>
> So it seems: in preparation for emigrating I have just shipped a 
> selection of my books (got the number down to 500!!!), DVDs, 70 
> souvenir coffee mugs from around the world and some clothes. 16 cartons 
> in total. Cost for the removal firm to come to my home, pack 
> everything, ship to Melbourne and at the other end deliver and unpack 
> was £500. 

If my parents emigration to the USA was anything to go by, they will omit the
final two steps. Please tell me you aren't using Pickfords?

-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

On 2008-09-16, Roger  wrote:
> The message 
> from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:
>
>> ....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
>
> So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistant?

Why are you conflating the greenhouse effect with global warming? Could it be
that you are seeking to mislead? Or are you merely an idiot?



-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

The message <gao3d5$40s$4@anubis.demon.co.uk>
from Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> contains these words:

> > from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:
> >
> >> ....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
> >
> > So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistent?

> Why are you conflating the greenhouse effect with global warming?
> Could it be
> that you are seeking to mislead? Or are you merely an idiot?

If you think you have a case why not make it instead of demonstrating
your penchant for meaningless insults.

Terry linked CO2 with global warming and the link is clearly the
greenhouse effect.

-- 
Roger Chapman

On 2008-09-16, Roger  wrote:
> The message <gao3d5$40s$4@anubis.demon.co.uk>
> from Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> contains these words:
>
>> > from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:
>> >
>> >> ....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
>> >
>> > So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistent?
>
>> Why are you conflating the greenhouse effect with global warming?
>> Could it be
>> that you are seeking to mislead? Or are you merely an idiot?
>
> If you think you have a case why not make it instead of demonstrating
> your penchant for meaningless insults.

Would pot please report to reception. Kettle is waiting for you.

> Terry linked CO2 with global warming and the link is clearly the
> greenhouse effect.

Sigh. Did you actually read what he wrote? (Rhetorical question. The answer is
obviously "No".)



-- 
          "Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain
                 and presumptuous desire for a second one."
               [email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org <dot> uk]

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "R D S"  saying
something like:

>Our 2 person household is 7.41 against a national average of 9.96 tonnes per 
>year.

1.39 tonnes for a 5-bed fully insulated detached house with various heat
inputs and free biomass.
At least, when it's completed...
Right now, it's considerably more than that.
-- 
Dave
GS850x2 XS650 SE6a

"It's a moron working with power tools.
 How much more suspenseful can you get?"
 - House

dennis@home wrote:

>
>
>"Terry Fields" <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> wrote in message 
>news:31nuc454uqf3f6kf6agdtv8ja9unr815ua@4ax.com...
>>
>> ARWadworth wrote:
>>
>>>So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.
>>
>> ...and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
>>
>> Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
>> shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
>> the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
>> instead.
>>
>> However, the dear old Beeb, always keen to support government policies
>> when they involve raising taxes for spurious reasons like this, showed
>> a programme on Sunday night(?) that tried to debunk the CO2-debunkers.
>> It 'answered' the 'sunspot' thing by saying that as sunspot activity
>> 'blew away' the cosmic rays that promote cloud formation (which cools
>> down the planet), sunspots had nothing to with climate change!
>
>Well if they said that then the BBC is talking cr@p.

Well, we had company round and I was watching the programme
intermittently - but I did catch the solar-wind thing, as I guessed
they needed to debunk that too, and it duly turned up.

I'd be grateful for a second opinion on what they said, though. The
solar-wind thing was near the end of the programme.

>Cosmic rays are high energy particles that solar wind has no effect on.

Exactly. So it doesn't really matter if the programme claimed whether
the solar wind stopped the cosmic rays, or vice versa.

>The damn things are travelling so fast they penetrate deeply into the 
>atmosphere where solar wind doesn't reach.
>If that is the basis they are discounting the cosmic ray effect on they need 
>to think again.
>I will have to get iPlayer out and view the program to see what other lies 
>they are telling the gullible.

Ah, here it is....Sunday evening, BBC2, "Earth: The Climate Wars",
2/3, Fightback, presenter Dr Iain Stewart.

I've just checked, and yes, Dr Iain Stewart says that the solar wind
'blows away the cosmic rays' (about 47 minutes in). But he uses the
argument that currently, planetary temperatures are on the increase,
but solar activity is level, thus debunking the effect of solar
activity on global warming.

You have to listen for the weasel words...slipped in somewhere, global
warming is 'partly' due to human activity, without saying what the
other effects are.

What he doesn't even mention is a) why the planet has cooled by 0.7
degC in the last year (NASA figures?), and why the planet warmed after
the Salutrians paddled in their kayaks from the south of France to
mid-North America along the edge of the ice-pack, about 20,000 years
ago. No man-made global-warming then!

The message <gaodl3$6l6$1@anubis.demon.co.uk>
from Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> contains these words:

> >> > from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:
> >> >
> >> >> ....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
> >> >
> >> > So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistent?
> >
> >> Why are you conflating the greenhouse effect with global warming?
> >> Could it be
> >> that you are seeking to mislead? Or are you merely an idiot?
> >
> > If you think you have a case why not make it instead of demonstrating
> > your penchant for meaningless insults.

> Would pot please report to reception. Kettle is waiting for you.

As I said above if you have a case make it, but no you come back with
more insults. Ergo you do not have a case to make.

> > Terry linked CO2 with global warming and the link is clearly the
> > greenhouse effect.

> Sigh. Did you actually read what he wrote? (Rhetorical question. The
> answer is
> obviously "No".)

One of the points I was responded to is still above (the other you
ignored). I leave it to our readers to decide whether your claim that I
obviously hadn't read what Terry wrote is anything other than fantasy.

Terry meanwhile hasn't responded.

-- 
Roger Chapman

"Andy Champ"  wrote in message 
news:2K2dnUei6oM1GVDVRVnygwA@eclipse.net.uk...
> I'm fairly average.  But I did some digging.  It doesn't care how much you 
> use the train, your CO2 figure is the same.  All those long distance 
> commuters will be pleased.  I imagine the rest is as bad.  After all, how 
> much difference does that mobile phone charger really make when I forget 
> to unplug it?
>
> Andy

I have tried again.

This time I filled the ticks in on the form that said that I drive like an 
idiot with exessive breaking etc, left all my computers on and all my 
chargers in 24/7.

Guess what? My action plan is the same

Buy a new freezer and take my washing out to dry (which I do if it is not 
raining)

Adam

Roger wrote:

>The message 
>from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:
>
>> ....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
>
>So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistant?

Not necessarily; it may be irrelevant, or overstated, or masked by
other mechanisms.

Don't forget the alarmist message that came from the various models
that all predicted a huge rise in 'global warming' due to CO2.

A little scientific investigation revealed that the models had been
'tuned' to give the same answer....exit the modelling as a serious
issue.

Then there was the Met Office, that claimed on national TV that it had
'proved' the link between 'global warming' and CO2. A search of their
website failed to find a published paper that gave that result. The
Met Office has been very quiet on the issue since then...exit the MetO
as a player.

No proponent of 'global warming' has exer explained why the planet
oscillates between cold and warm states; the best they can do is claim
that human activity is 'partly' to blame and 'might' accellerate
'global warming'.

I believe that 17000 scientists work on 'global warming', but the case
for it is made by about a tenth of that number.

>> Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
>> shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
>> the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
>> instead.
>
>If the greenhouse effect is real, and it has been accepted as fact for
>over a century, then whether or not CO2 concentrations tend to lag or
>lead is an interesting side issue.
>
>There is a rational explanation for the lag, if it really does exist, in
>that some of the extra CO2 is expelled from the sea as sea temperatures
>rise and the sea is such a huge heat sink that it lags years behind
>atmospheric temperature trends. 

Possibly; but if CO2-led 'global warming' is a flaky issue - and I've
touched on some of those above - it might not matter.

I wish I could find the reference that said the planet had cooled by
0.7 degC in the last 12 months - a rise of that magnitude would have
been trumpeted from high buildings by the supporters of CO2-led
'global warming'; instead of the current deafening silence.

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 16:16:19 GMT, "ARWadworth"
 wrote:

>Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?
>
>I just tried out <http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx>
>
I gave up halfway through. I could calculate ours myself without too
much difficulty. I know on average how many litres of LPG we use per
annum, similarly how much diesel and how many units of electricity,
and we don't take holidays. I could work out the CO2 equivalents of
the LPG and diesel, given some grey matter activity, but calculating
the CO2 equivalent of the electricity would be more difficult given
the various ways it's generated (coal, gas, nuclear, etc). But it
would be easier if I could use instant conversion factors from the
web. Does anyone know them, or can anyone point me to a site that
does?

-- 
 
Chris

E-mail: christopher[dot]hogg[at]virgin[dot]net

Roger wrote:
> The message 
> from Terry Fields <no.spam.here@thanks.invalid> contains these words:
>
>> ....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.
>
> So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistant?
>
>> Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperat