Hi everyone!
I must apologise that I have not posted much recently, it has not been for lack of enthusiasm of topics, so much has happened!
It has been a busy period however, I have found it difficult to find time to write much! Hence my new approach, to venture into the world of the video blog (vlog), in the hope that it will make blogging more efficient and flexible.
To this end, I have created a short welcome video, explaining the subjects that I would like to cover by way of a test. Suggestions are welcome, as I become more confident I hope the quality will improve!
See the video blog here: http://youtu.be/O3BYi
Mike.
Showing posts with label sustainability. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sustainability. Show all posts
Saturday, 22 November 2014
Friday, 8 February 2013
Where's my Waste Hierarchy?
Recently there has been quite a bit of discussion around the Waste Hierarchy, introduced into UK statute following transposition of the revised Waste Framework Directive.
People are starting to question how it might be properly implemented and enforced, quite reasonable questions, I would say!
Currently it seems to be struggling for recognition, for the important element of regulation that it is. The Waste Hierarchy is a mainstay of the prime objectives of the Environmental Action Plan and for sustainability in the waste and resource management sector.
There are a number of reasons for this, not least that the Waste Hierarchy is seen as being self regulating, however a lesson learnt from a very similar roll out of the Duty of Care over 20 years ago, informs us that this wasn't entirely successful!
There are also a number of other reasons why it been difficult to implement, I have outlined some of these below. The solutions to these are not particularly simple, but could be tackled with a proper strategy and some resource.
Briefly these area:
People are starting to question how it might be properly implemented and enforced, quite reasonable questions, I would say!
Currently it seems to be struggling for recognition, for the important element of regulation that it is. The Waste Hierarchy is a mainstay of the prime objectives of the Environmental Action Plan and for sustainability in the waste and resource management sector.
There are a number of reasons for this, not least that the Waste Hierarchy is seen as being self regulating, however a lesson learnt from a very similar roll out of the Duty of Care over 20 years ago, informs us that this wasn't entirely successful!
There are also a number of other reasons why it been difficult to implement, I have outlined some of these below. The solutions to these are not particularly simple, but could be tackled with a proper strategy and some resource.
Briefly these area:
- Current behaviours in C & I waste collection, whereby the contractors take on all the responsibility (or maybe not). This is mainly why the tick box exists on the DoC WTN.
- Lack of clear policy on waste planning. In turn this leads to lack of, or inappropriate investment in handling and treatment technologies. Most of the money is currently following EfW because of the potential for ROC's/RHI, this conflicts with the Waste Hierarchy to some extent.
- Slow drafting and implementation of End of Waste criteria is hampering the the quality assurance that is needed to underpin recyclate markets. Volatility leads to more waste being exported (often illegally), incinerated or landfilled.
- Similar (or better) incentives need to be put in place to encourage re-use.
- Waste reduction, and avoidance needs clear policy leads and should sit with one department and have a much higher profile than it has currently
All companies with Environmental Management Systems should now be looking at how they can comply with the requirements of the Waste Hierarchy and it should become a regular feature of CSR reporting, that would be a start!
Friday, 18 January 2013
Questioning the current model?
I wanted to use this latest blog to ask a few questions, rather than just spout off, to ask some very fundamental questions to us all. Questions about are we really happy, does ownership make us feel more satisfied and what are the alternatives?
Increasingly for the majority of us, life is becoming a blur, dashing from one customer or meeting to the next, trying to be more productive or just trying to stay in the game. Squeezing the kids into a busy schedule between work, shopping and cooking a meal for friends.
Hang on a moment, rewind that a bit........squeeze the kids in!!!! Surely the children are our most prized asset and should bring us love and joy that mere acquisition alone could never do!
OK, I know that sound very sloppy and possibly even a little rose tinted, but I believe it highlights one of the fundamental problems with our way of life, capitalist culture and underlying happiness. What could we all do to change this, to live a better, more relaxed and fulfilled life?
We could all work less hours for a start, its not as crazy as it seems, several studies show that a working week of 21 hours would create full employment and more opportunity for recreation and community interaction. That might seem a little scary in the context of out current lifestyle, but it is a more natural state for a species that is inherently tribal.
If we work less, surely we earn less? Yes, that would be true, but we don't have to individually own everything that we use. If you live in an average suburban house, you will have some lawn and in all probability own a lawnmower. You then go out on a weekend and use it for half an hour, and that is that! However, if you (and your neighbours) have more more time, then many more of you could share that lawnmower and the garden tools too!
Bike pools and car pools are becoming more popular, hopefully the idea of sharing over ownership will become the norm. this will have the dual benefits of reducing expenditure and resource intensity, win win!
But wont that lead more recession and job losses? Probably, but herein lies another thread of our underlying problem, which is the economic model itself. The current model of capitalism is based upon a model that demands year on year growth to support monetary expansion and lending. This model is facing obvious limitations as we reach environmental thresholds and population growth increases demand for energy, food, water and increased wealth and living standards.
If we just focus on the main principles of well being, then it is possible to support a larger population in a more sustainable way. It is the accretion of wealth and belief that acquisition and ownership relates to well being that needs to be challenged.
Are there alternatives? Yes, without doubt there are numerous different economic models, we just need to be educated about them and accepting of the rules as to how they work. The current capitalist model is often termed as being neo-liberal, that is to say (in simple terms) it advocates free markets, which should self regulate and through investment and the subsequent return on investment create growth. An important facet of this though, is that the wealth that is created will be distributed, if not evenly, at least fairly across the whole domain.
This has not been the case however, in recent times with the formation of the super rich and global corporations. Through careful manipulation of money supply, interference in democratic process and endless advertising of an aspirational society, the distribution of the wealth created has become extremely uneven and a huge proportion of the wealth now sits in fewer and fewer hands, this is neither conducive to a stable society, nor a stable economy.
There is plenty of wealth to go around, but we are not conditioned to see that sufficiently to realise that need to and can change it!
I hope that as the realisation of the failings of the current model become more stark, that each of us will ask more questions and come up with innovative and individual ideas to change it. This can only lead to greater and more robust democracy, improved well being and satisfaction as well as a more sustainable and livable society.
Increasingly for the majority of us, life is becoming a blur, dashing from one customer or meeting to the next, trying to be more productive or just trying to stay in the game. Squeezing the kids into a busy schedule between work, shopping and cooking a meal for friends.
Hang on a moment, rewind that a bit........squeeze the kids in!!!! Surely the children are our most prized asset and should bring us love and joy that mere acquisition alone could never do!
OK, I know that sound very sloppy and possibly even a little rose tinted, but I believe it highlights one of the fundamental problems with our way of life, capitalist culture and underlying happiness. What could we all do to change this, to live a better, more relaxed and fulfilled life?
We could all work less hours for a start, its not as crazy as it seems, several studies show that a working week of 21 hours would create full employment and more opportunity for recreation and community interaction. That might seem a little scary in the context of out current lifestyle, but it is a more natural state for a species that is inherently tribal.
If we work less, surely we earn less? Yes, that would be true, but we don't have to individually own everything that we use. If you live in an average suburban house, you will have some lawn and in all probability own a lawnmower. You then go out on a weekend and use it for half an hour, and that is that! However, if you (and your neighbours) have more more time, then many more of you could share that lawnmower and the garden tools too!
Bike pools and car pools are becoming more popular, hopefully the idea of sharing over ownership will become the norm. this will have the dual benefits of reducing expenditure and resource intensity, win win!
But wont that lead more recession and job losses? Probably, but herein lies another thread of our underlying problem, which is the economic model itself. The current model of capitalism is based upon a model that demands year on year growth to support monetary expansion and lending. This model is facing obvious limitations as we reach environmental thresholds and population growth increases demand for energy, food, water and increased wealth and living standards.
If we just focus on the main principles of well being, then it is possible to support a larger population in a more sustainable way. It is the accretion of wealth and belief that acquisition and ownership relates to well being that needs to be challenged.
Are there alternatives? Yes, without doubt there are numerous different economic models, we just need to be educated about them and accepting of the rules as to how they work. The current capitalist model is often termed as being neo-liberal, that is to say (in simple terms) it advocates free markets, which should self regulate and through investment and the subsequent return on investment create growth. An important facet of this though, is that the wealth that is created will be distributed, if not evenly, at least fairly across the whole domain.
This has not been the case however, in recent times with the formation of the super rich and global corporations. Through careful manipulation of money supply, interference in democratic process and endless advertising of an aspirational society, the distribution of the wealth created has become extremely uneven and a huge proportion of the wealth now sits in fewer and fewer hands, this is neither conducive to a stable society, nor a stable economy.
There is plenty of wealth to go around, but we are not conditioned to see that sufficiently to realise that need to and can change it!
I hope that as the realisation of the failings of the current model become more stark, that each of us will ask more questions and come up with innovative and individual ideas to change it. This can only lead to greater and more robust democracy, improved well being and satisfaction as well as a more sustainable and livable society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)