www.everythingsgonegreen.co.uk

My wife found this on facebook this morning. Doesn’t this just hit the mark? Here’s a transcript of the image text:

 [Image of spoon]

It’s pretty amazing that our society has reached a point where the effort necessary to

• Extract oil from the ground
• Ship it to a refinery
• Turn it into plastic
• Shape it appropriately
• Truck it to a store
• Buy it, and bring it home

…is considered to be less effort than what it takes to just wash the spoon when you’re done with it.

Sorry, plastic spoon manufacturers, but your time is up!

{EAV_BLOG_VER:d8d8317f40d9f024}
In an article that kicks off by cramming in a dizzying glut-fest of as many marketing buzzwords as possible, Ethical Corporation have written an interesting piece about how social media appears to be driving sustainability in big business these days.

If you can wade your way through the jungle of marketing terms such as brand managers, brand transparency, brand value leadership, brand gatekeepers, strategic differentiation and brand equity, there’s an interesting look at how the world appears to be changing in the light of social media.

What this new episode boils down to is that we seem to be seeing a transformation in business as we see greater transparency through social media.

Kit Kat Killers

One great example of transparency resulting from social media is how Kit Kat slapped a Fairtrade logo on its products, an act of blatant greenwashing, conning consumers into thinking Kit Kat was a responsible brand and appealing to ethical consumers.

But, back in 2010, when Greenpeace accused Nestlé, owners of the Kit Kat brand, of duplicity the eyes of the world then focused on Nestlé, their products and the “little green lies” they told.

Kit Kat products are made using palm oil and, without sustainable sourcing, the demand for palm oil causes deforestation. Deforestation for palm oil, in Indonesia for instance, destroys the habitats of Oran-utangs, and Oran-utangs are an endangered species. How could a popular global product boast “Fairtrade” credentials when its drive for profits were guilty of destroying forests, and killing threatened species in Indonesia? (See the Greenpeace feature on palm oil)

So Greenpeace went on a crusade against Nestlé and Kit Kat, rebranding the product Nestle Killer. Particularly effective, was Greenpeace’ hard-hitting Give the Oran-utang a Break campaign.

The social media campaign from Greenpeace had an instant impact with an increase in some very negative (buzzword alert!) brand awareness. The word spread far across twitter, when I was watching it at the time, and I remember how Nestlé and Kit Kat got a good public kicking with a sustained burst of activity from angry twitter users.

What the Ethical Corporation article failed to mention was the actual result. Written by a brand marketing professional the piece went on to describe how brand managers could, er, better manage their brands under the scrutiny of a world eager to prevent further lies, damn lies and greenwash.

The global Swiss brand published a press release announcing Nestlé open forum on deforestation, Malaysia. This was as a direct result to the Greenpeace campaign to which they closed on their own announcement Sweet success for Kit Kat campaign: you asked, Nestlé has answered. Nestlé also became a member of the Roundtable for Responsible Palm Oil.

Nike? Transparency?

The other “example” of social media driving greater transparency and sustainability, about Nike, is a bit weak. In fact it’s more of a brand-boosting piece about how Nike are using environmentally-friendly rubber and helping a few homeless people. It’s basically more about Nike’s Public Relations crusade than anything about transparency, sustainabilty and social media.

A global company as big as Nike should be doing far more than focusing on just two issues and then milking them for all they’re worth. As a “concerned citizen” their policy really doesn’t make the grade. You’ve only got to look at our piece last month on Big Brands Polluting Rivers in China. Whilst Nike allegedly restrict the use of hazardous chemicals in their manufacturing process, their suppliers are still pumping out polluted waste water. Nike are, by association, still contributing to the problem by continuing to source from suppliers who fail to clean up.

In Conclusion

The Greenpeace social media campaign is the only one that’s forced any transparency. If anyone has any further examples of how social media is forcing transparency and sustainability onto global corporations then I’d be happy to add them to the list.

Other examples of the power of social media in bringing about positive change are the “Arab spring” where the government of Egypt was toppled in a social movement, part-powered by social media.

But that’s not all about what sustainability is about is it?

Transparency should be applied to all brands, businesses and corporations, all their products. Everything they do should be sustainable from the source materials they use, to the energy they consume, and to the way they run their offices, make their goods, ship them to the public and how the products are dealt with after the end of their life.

In short, the complete product lifecycle and the institutions behind them need to look at every single process and make them ALL  environmentally-friendly, carbon-neutral, ethically-sourced, socially-responsible and utterly transparent.

It’s NOT about all the things that marketers and brand managers, at the end of the food chain, can do to seem in touch with their products. It’s about a grass roots culture of making EVERYTHING go green so that processes do not need to be fixed at the tips and go backwards but from the root, from the source. Only then will everything else fall into place.

</sermon over>

{EAV_BLOG_VER:d8d8317f40d9f024}
I was walking home from the local shops last night when I spied between the wood and wire panels of a fence, a load of beer cans stuffed inbetween. Then, a few minutes later, as I was walking through the woodland at the end of my road, I saw more beer cans littered around. As per usual, it’s often Fosters cans that you see littering the place.

This makes me think – Why are there no reverse vending machines in Farnborough? For that matter, why are there so few reverse vending machines anywhere in this country?

Can you believe it was 2 and a half years ago that we first wrote about reverse vending? The couple in that story, from Petersfield in Hampshire, paid for their honeymoon by collecting litter and feeding the reverse vending machine. The very same thought went through my mind last night – The benefits are many:

1. I could benefit personally by picking up those empty aluminium cans and taking them to get money for them. Money plus the satisfaction of doing a good job for the community and seeing my neighbourhood clean is the most beneficial personal outcome. Mercenary, I know
2. Any other Tom, Dick or Harry passing could make a few coins by doing so.
3. The perpetrators who dropped the litter in the first place could clear up after themselves and get a small discount on their drinking habits. But then, if they’re the sort of people who drink Fosters lager and drop litter in the first place, then that’s probably hoping too much for them.

So why are there still so few reverse vending machines around? Whilst I have the utmost respect for anti-litter campaigns and the likes of organisations like Keep Britain Tidy, I still think that messages like “You shouldn’t drop rubbish” and “you should keep it tidy” are weak and, to prove a point, they have been ignored for years. What we need is something to help backup that message with where and why you should do so, and “keeping it tidy” still isn’t enough – the financial incentive in these austere times, should help for the more thrifty amongst us.

So if there are any reverse vending companies out there or anyone else who can answer the question “Why are there no reverse vending machines in Farnborough?” then we’d love to hear from you. And, if that doesn’t get enough attention, then we’re going to have to approach a few of these reverse vending companies, supermarkets and councils ourselves and get some answers for you readers.

Yesterday morning just one piece of mail came through the letterbox – Ecotricity’s Progress Report 2010.

That’s just one very good reason for choosing Ecotricity as our green energy supplier all those years ago – They’re open, they’re honest and they keep their customers informed which is something I’ve not seen from any other energy company.

(more…)

Four days ago we were sent our latest water bill for the forthcoming year (April 2011-March 2012). Seeing that we had a water meter installed nearly a year ago we were pretty shocked to see that the bill was 10% more than the previous year. Last year the water bill was £320. This year it was £350. One person, a water meter, and the cost of water supply and removal went UP?

Immediately after receiving the bill we called South East Water to ask why they still had the house on the “RV” or Rateable Value tariff.

Today, just four days later, we were sent our revised bill – We are currently in credit to the tune of £213.35 however the very helpful telephone staff at South East Water said that we “couldn’t pay nothing” so we’ve got a monthly payment schedule of £2.00 a month.

The water company cocked up with their engineer not informing them of the install of the meter, the meter hasn’t been read (Because SEW were unaware we had one) and so we paid over the top for our water. So this is justice for having forked out £320 last year.

The next step is that SEW will take a meter reading and then re-issue a new bill based on our water consumption which, for a pretty green household, should be low.

There’s been no mention of a refund yet but it looks like having a water meter fitted is finally paying off. I’ve also heard that there is a single occupancy rate for people who might live on their own in a 3-bed property but I shall have a chat with Ofwat and let you know the results of that discussion too.

Do you remember when we had that water meter fitted in May last year?

The main reason was a financial one – We’ve got a short-flush toilet, a shower and we keep our water usage low and yet last year’s bill, from South East Water, for April 1^st 2010 – March 31^st 2011, was still a whopping £320. Considering the house is single occupancy for 44 weeks of the year that’s a lot of money to splash out on H₂O. I figured that by fitting a water meter the water bill would go down.

March 15th 2011 – The water bill comes through the door and the cost for the forthcoming year is – £350! So I get a meter fitted and my bill goes UP nearly 10%. I’ve had a water meter for nearly a year and, looking at the details of the bill, they’re still charging me based upon the Rateable Value of my house. It’s only a 3-bed semi but I’m being charged the same amount as my next-door neighbour and there are 4 people living at their property (4x as many showers, toilet flushes, washing machine loads etc).

I called South East Water to tell them they were taking the piss (and the rain water, the bath water, the dish water etc.) and they immediately spotted that they were still charging me on “the RV”. I asked why this was so and they stuttered a bit to explain but blamed it on a systems failure between the installation engineer and the backend system at the water company.

South East Water have said that they will send me a revised bill, so watch out for an update – I’ve gone green and I’m trying to save money so let’s hope this works out to our advantage rather than for the shareholders of the utility company.

SO – If you’ve just got your water bill and you’ve had a water meter installed make sure you’re not being charged at the Rateable Value and inform your water company immediately. We’re trying to go green, use less water and drive our costs down, so good luck people!

I decided last year to start investing some of my savings with Triodos Bank. As a green and ethical citizen I though that I’d vote with my “green” and give it to an ethical bank that would invest my meagre savings in a positive way. Whilst I’ve deposited the tiniest amount with them, I intend to move most of my savings to Triodos to ensure all my money is being looked after by and invested in sustainable causes.

So it was great interest today that I saw a press release from Triodos Bank – Hot on the heels of the RBS Customer Charter and the Natwest Customer Charter it seems that Triodos are about as pleased with RBS and Natwest as RBS and Natwest customers are! Here’s the Triodos press release:

Commenting on the RBS / Natwest customer charter, Charles Middleton, UK managing director at Triodos Bank, said:

“These service commitments should be bread and butter for all banks. Firstly, customers have a right to a basic level of service yet it’s clear that some banks continue to fail to deliver. Little wonder, then, that when asked, one in five (21%)  Brits could not find a single reason to recommend their bank*.

“Customers are entitled to expect more from their banks.  The customer service element should be a given but we believe the public should be asking for, and getting, more than this, for example, some sense of what their bank is doing with the money they entrust to it, and greater transparency on investment decisions.  Amazingly, 35% of UK banking customers think their money simply sits in a bank vault or benefits from occasional interest. Few realise how a bank may actually be using their money, and most banks don’t make it easy for customers to be more aware of this and give their opinion. However, 61% of people would like to be with a bank that shares their values.

“We urge dissatisfied customers to take action, approach their banks and demand not just a basic level of service, but more than this, including transparency on how they use savers’ deposits, so that the public can vote with its feet on issues that matter to them.”

A recent, separate survey among Triodos Bank customers revealed 94% of the ethical bank’s customers would recommend Triodos to others.  Other findings from Triodos customer survey among 1000 customers in February:

• 63% choose to save with Triodos as they know how their money is being used
• Less than 5% feel negative or indifferent about saving with Triodos, most customers are satisfied, happy, content
• 51%  trust Triodos to do the right thing
• 69% feel like they are doing the right thing by banking with Triodos

* Opinium Research carried out an online survey of 2,000 UK adults aged 18+ from 19th to 21st January 2011. Results have been weighted to nationally representative criteria.

Well, I wasn’t polled or interviewed but I can say, as a green, an environmentalist, cheerleader of localism, organic food fan, ethics ambassador, supporter of social responsibility & sustainability  etc etc etc that I feel 100% satisfied with the way Triodos Bank handle and invest my money.

Long may it continue

Last December I had gear change issues on the Subaru Legacy. So, in light of finances, the environment and a great excuse to “give it a go” I gave up the car.

I let the tax disc expire, declared Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) because, if you don’t declare, it gives the DVLA an easy opportunity to squeeze revenue from lazy/unsuspecting motorists. I also cancelled the insurance and then left the car on the drive.

Nine months later, what’s it been like without a car?

Shopping

Well, at first there was the noticeable issue of not being able to simply go to the shops at any time and do a “big shop”. Not having the car limits the amount of shopping you can carry. Being restricted from the boot of an estate car to either a couple of bags, if waking, to a rucksack, if cycling, is quite a downsize in terms of capacity. Carrying a crate of beer is out of the question.

And then there’s the times you can go shopping – If it’s chucking down with rain, it’s probably best to stay in. Snow? Again, if it’s treacherous in a car then it’s insane to go out on  a bicycle. As for night or day – the quickest way to one of the local stores is across meadows by the Blackwater River – at night it’s extremely dark down there – I wouldn’t advise the Mrs or my kid to travel that way at that time of night.

Other than that shopping is restricted to what can be carried so it has to be very efficient. Get only what you need and no more. Necessities in, luxuries out. The further one has to travel to get specialist items, the greater this applies so most essentials tend to be purchased closer to home.

Work

Strangely enough, when the car was taken off the road England was then hit by snowstorms. Cycling in the snow can be fun but is ultimately pretty tough and an insane pursuit when the snow has turned to ice. Getting to work then had to be done on foot. The first day back at work in the new year took over an hour (it’s a 40 minute walk) and there was nobody in the building – NOBODY. 20 offices and not a soul in sight!

Cycling to work is quicker than walking but slower than driving, that is IF the roads are clear for the car. On a clear road it’s a 10 minute car journey but with traffic it can take anything up to an hour. Cycling however takes around 20 minutes plus it keeps you fit too.

Carrying kit to work is also limited to a rucksack so in the summer it’s OK but winter cycling means cramming a change of clothes, waterproofs etc into the rucksack. Your bag’s heavier & bulkier and you don’t want to be breaking anything by forcing it into there.

Of course, you have to either carry a change of clothes or have spares at work – working in a sweaty t-shirt is a no-no as is sitting there soaked from the rain or caked in mud (If you took the off-road route)

Leisure

Leisure pursuits have been impacted greatly by not having a car. Getting to far-away places has been tough so the spare time activities have had a more local flavour for the last nine months.

Last summer it was straight to Stonhenge, park up, walk around, enjoy the summer solstice. This year it all had to be cancelled due to the lack of transport. Getting a bus to Salisbury on a Sunday night to travel via whatever means necessary to see the sun up and then get back in time for work was an impossibility.

So far this year has centred around Farnborough (Not much to do other than a couple of nice pubs), Guildford, an evening in Basingstoke, a trip to Reading and one day in London. The places to visit have been limited by the lack of a car but at least knowledge of the rail network is improved.

One afternoon was spent in the wonderful old town of Aldershot, home of the British Army; the taxi fare there was £15 but the return journey by bus was just £2.20

So, Can You Live Without a Car?

Yes you can but it’s tough, especially for someone who absolutely loves cars.

It’s also hard work in the bad weather, difficult if you have a small family, if you have to be smart, wear a suit etc.

The trains are expensive, impromptu journeys are expensive, getting direct from A to B often involves a convoluted route, you can’t carry much and you’re often at the mercy of the weather.

The positives are that you save on insurance, road tax, fuel and maintenance. That may well be a saving of many hundreds of pounds a year but when you look at the prices train operators charge you’re robbing Peter to pay Paul.

However, one big saving is CO₂; your emissions are negligible. Public transport can be fun, especially with a big group of people. You get to see things locally that you didn’t see before, you get to know your local routes better, all the short cuts etc.

Travelling to the local train stations (there are three within a 20 minute bike ride/40 minute walk) is better by bike but you worry that your expensive ride is locked up at the station and could get stolen. Walking is better then but takes longer.

So it all depends on your circumstances, where you live, how far away the shops, schools, work is, how far away your friends live, what the roads are like etc.

Conclusion

It has been good fun and public transport is definitely on the travel agenda from now onwards. Trains can be expensive (especially long distance), buses can be relatively expensive and having one bus & rail company’s director in The Times Rich List every year shows that they’re making  a pretty penny out of people who have to use their services.

Cycling is great when the weather’s good as is walking and, best of all, it keeps you fit and healthy.

But there are times when I feel I need a car; I’d love to visit some of my relatives with my family and travel door-to-door without the expenses incurred from train, bus and taxi journeys.

If oil was so expensive that everybody had to give up driving there’d be a time of tough change in people’s lifestyles. But if the public transport companies (that are owned and operated by private companies – ironic, I know) could facilitate cheaper travel then more people would use buses and trains and economies of scale would kick in.

I still want to drive but during the summer I’ll cycle to work and back thank you

Today a contractor turned up on behalf of South East Water and installed a water meter at my request. It was a pretty quick and easy job and the water meter was actually installed at the point in the public highway (the footpath at the end of my drive actually) where the water pipes into my property rather than in the house as I had suspected (I was concerned it would be yet another  a big ugly box just like the gas and electric meters that take up space inside an understairs cupboard in the hallway)

I have to admit, the main reason for getting a water meter installed was a financial one. Currently I occupy a 3-bedroomed semi-detached house on my own whilst my better half and daughter spend an extended period of time abroad. The local council reduce my council tax rates for single occupancy but the water company do not. The annual bill for water is approximately £320 and that is based on the rateable value of the property.

Somewhere down the line you can only assume that the water companies have estimated the average use and cost of water supply, drainage and sewerage for a typical 3-bed semi with X amount of people living there. In my case that doesn’t apply so it makes pefect sense to be metered – So, presumably, the cost of my water bills should  come down.

Now here’s the green bit…

Because this is a green-thinking household there is a bath in the house but showers are more than 99% of the time. A shower uses a third of the volume of water that a bath does (plus it’s quicker to take a shower than run a bath, as we all know) OK, there is a Turner Monsoon pump fitted to boost the water pressure of the shower (and it uses electricity) but that’s because the water pressure is really pathetic in the bathroom and it’s virtually unusable without a boost. Continuing to have showers rather than baths will keep the water consumption down. Winner.

Then there’s the fact that  a low-flush toilet was installed in the bathroom, the only WC in the house. Not only does it use less water to flush than the previous Armitage Shanks cistern from 1964 but it has a dual-flush that uses less water (depending on whether you flush number 1s or number 2s ). Winner #2.

Also, by not driving a car, partly out of green choice, partly for health & fitness and partly for financial reasons, the cars don’t get washed. Winner #3.

And then there’s the water butt in the garden. Because the local council had a great deal on a compost bin we saved enough money to have a water butt purchased & delivered for the same cost as had we just had the composting bin on its own. Winner #4.

So it looks like this could be a win-win situation – Not only does this household save water but it saves money too. If you’re green and you haven’t got a water meter installed then it might be time to consider doing so. I’ll keep you posted as to how long it is before the water company start reducing our water bills – you know what these big companies are like when it comes to letting go of your cash…

Footnote: I just had a look at the volumetric water meter manufacturer’s website. Being a marketing guy myself I wasn’t totally enamoured at the language used for the V210 meter:

V200 and V210 volumetric meters are designed to maximise revenue collection.

Now I know the website is not consumer-focused but when they stumble across the term “maximise revenue collection” it doesn’t sound fair does it? Maybe I should suggest to the manufacturer that they use the term “optimise revenue collection” – that would be far more agreeable, don’t you think?