The Furrowed 502 Brow...
...where, if you can raise the energy to actually post something, you can get serious.
Jump to more content from this blog
About this blog
PM The evening news and current affairs programme presented by Eddie Mair.
iPM The programme that starts with its listeners. Join the discussions online and contribute ideas for a weekly programme presented by Eddie Mair and Jennifer Tracey.
The PM Privacy Commission
Read the final report of the PM Privacy Commission.
- Full Audio and Transcripts
- Hugh Tomlinson QC
- Zac Goldsmith MP
- Max Mosley
- Stephen Abell
- Hugh Grant
- Sir Charles Gray
- Alan Rusbridger
- Helen Wood
- Max Clifford
- Marcus Partington
- John Kampfner
- Christopher Graham
- Louise Mensch
- Andy Trotter
- John Mullin
- Avril Sanders Royle
- Jimmy Wales
Meet the commissioners, view the terms of reference and hear the Commission Chair Sir Michael Lyons explain his approach.
RSS feed
Email us
Listen to PM
Well...?
Frustrating Eddie for ALL concerned AND disappointing that the gremlin struck again on the Saturday launch date of iPM...
Saboutage by the Today Team??? Or, Blue Peter trying to move the focus from their latest..?
No? Then I'll adopt my usual stance and lay the blame squarely on Rupert's shoulders. Well, he's young and can take it. And, he's never complained. To me at any rate...
But my guess would be Saturday's events presented the PM and iPM team members with substantial un-needed additional pressures and to their great credit, nothing adverse was apparent throughout the broadcast
The "show" went on and was a good first outing for iPM. An eclectic, eye-opening in one case - "Broke" - and stimulating mix of topics. Well worth listening to
In iPM's case, a bit of the "Gloss" undoubtedly missing from the overall concept because sound tracks couldn't be accessed and responses during and immediately after the prog couldn't be made
But what's past is past...
The show's now on the road
Let's just pray, the Techie's have finally sorted out the issues...
Very well, thank you.
noun [C]
a deep hole in the ground from which water, oil or gas can be obtained.
DiY...... ever helpfull:)
..bet that gets the 502 teatment..
Well, well.
Eddie (1) I am, thanks for asking.
Okay, to start the discussions going, I'd like to hear people's thoughts/arguments regarding whether taxing larger, more fuel-inefficient cars at a higher rate is a good or bad idea...
Charlie,
"Let's just pray, the Techie's have finally sorted out the issues.
Is such an anticipatory tense appropriate? Is there any evidence they have (or will), and to who/what/whom should one address one's supplications?
xx
ed
The most dangerous food is wedding cake.
-- American proverb
I'm very well - thanks for asking, Eddie! More to the point, how are you, Birthday Boy?!
I'm pretty sure there will be a party on the Beach later :o)
Happy Birthday, Eddie x
Not really serious or topical, but can I just say a great big HAPPY BIRTHDAY EDDIE!!! I meant to bake a lovely cake, which I was going to ice myself and package it all up to send to you with a beautiful home made card but, well, I didn't....ok sorry! Anyhoo I hope you have a lovely day
Fiona x
How about ten thousand thoughtful folk flying to Bali to discuss ameliorating Greenhouse emissions?
xx
ed
P.S. a very GOOD idea, FFred, and, while we're at it swingeing taxes on air travel and even small cars.
Chicken Little only has to be right once.
How about ten thousand thoughtful folk flying to Bali to discuss ameliorating Greenhouse emissions?
xx
ed
P.S. a very GOOD idea, FFred, and, while we're at it swingeing taxes on air travel and even small cars.
Chicken Little only has to be right once.
Fiona you are most kind...and thanks to GM for my lovely card.
I am 42. Should I now have more understanding of life, the universe and everything?
Sorry about the ipm Blog probs. We're hoping to do better.
Happy Birthday Eddie!
And you don't look a day over 41.
Happy Birthday Eddie!
And you don't look a day over 41.
Well I turn the very same age as you Eddie on Friday (am a mere 4 days younger than you), so if you can enlighten me on how wise I should feel come that day that would help. Presently I just feel old, crabby and forgetful......
Hope you like your e-card by the way!
Well I turn the very same age as you Eddie on Friday (am a mere 4 days younger than you), so if you can enlighten me on how wise I should feel come that day that would help. Presently I just feel old, crabby and forgetful......
Hope you like your e-card by the way!
Happy Birthday, Eddie.
Fearless (6),
Here in Richmond, the local council started to do that for car parking zones. So that only hits people who *don't* drive to work and are too poor to own property that has off-street parking. Had it been a local vehicle excise duty, I would have been rather more in favour of it than this scheme that actualy only affects 1/6th of the residents of the borough.
A green move? I doubt it, more like money raising.
One problem with such a scheme is that some people are prepared to pay vast sums on some big gas-guzzler, they will pay vast sums in excise duty. It sounds rather communistic, but if the motor industry did not make those cars in the first place, they would not be such a problem. After all, when Land Rovers were uncomfortable square boxes, no townie dreamt of owning one unless they had the need of 4 wheel drive.
"Sorry about the ipm Blog probs. We're hoping to do better.
The old ones are the best ones!
xx
ed
I've tried to wish you a Happy Birthday on the Beach, Eddie, but the 502 tide keeps washing it away.
Have a great day. 42 is indeed the answer, but you've always been the centre of our universe!
OK - pass me the bucket . . .
As I turn the very same age as you on Friday (am a mere 4 days younger than you Eddie), perhaps you can enlighten me as to what level of wisdom etc I should have achieved by then, when you work it out for yourself. For now I just feel old, crabby and very forgetful!!
BTW hope you liked your e-card!!
In anticipation of tonights Cameron item regarding rape, it never ceases to amaze me how it can possibly be known that there are too many rapists getting away with the crime. This claim seriously undermines our already beleagured (sp?) Criminal Justice System and leads to further tinkering to ensure that people get convicted with weaker and weaker evidence.
I am all in favour of people who commit these crimes being caught and punished but if people aren't reporting a crime then we cannnot know if a crime has been committed. If people are found not guilty at trial then we must accept the decision of the court unless further evidence comes to light which was not available at the time of trial. If we do not accept the court's verdict then we are not entitled to accept verdicts of guilty by jury's or magistrates.
Mary
Deepthought (17)
You get my vote for deep thinking today.
Whoever thinks there should be more excise duty on gas-guzzling cars seems unaware of the 80%+ duty and VAT currently charged on petrol & diesel. Better to try and deter people from using their status symbols than punish them for an anti-social purchasing decision they have already made.
I tend to agree with you Deepthought(17). "Green" taxes just seem to be another money making exercise that doesn't really address the problem. Its clear we need to take drastic action to reduce co2 emmissions. Therefore I don't understand why the Government simply just doesn't ban the production of certain types of vehicle and make all future cars produced comply to a certain engine type - e.g. like the Prius with its hybrid engine. If you have to drive a 4x4 then you would have to apply for a special permit in which you had to justify your reasons for driving such a vehicle, e.g. your profession as a farmer etc etc. Just thinking out loud really - but it just seems endlessly taxing folks isn't really solving the problem because, as Deepthought said, the people who are willing to pay big bucks for a big gas guzzling car rarely miss the extra few pounds on excise duty.
Re extra charges for gas-guzzling cars.
I think a better solution would be to make it socially unacceptable to drive huge or inefficient cars - Greenpeace had an advert about one such driver and people would blank him and spit in his tea etc - and even more usefully, change the trend towards short contracts so that people can but houses close to where they work and thereby reduce the need to commute long distances.
The first option has little chance of working: people love their status symbols. The second option is now totally impossible: the Market dictates that everyone should be flexible and have many different jobs and even careers in their life and there seems to be no arguing with the Market.
(Though for myself I'd like to give the Market a swift kick up the bum.)
Sorry Vyle. I don't agree. More polluting, inefficient vehicles should get well and truly hammered by means of road tax. Raising taxes via the petrol pump is a less efficient way of hitting the real polluters.
The government should also change the way that it taxes air travel. A standard charge on each passenger per flight is not hitting the real culprits although it certainly raises a lot of money from Eayjet and Ryanair and the like, because they usually have pretty full flights. Much fairer and 'greener' to have a tax on the plane journey itself, where the old polluting planes are more highly taxed, longer journeys are more higly taxed and the tax is the same whether the plane is 10% or 100% full.
Vyle (22),
"Better to try and deter people from using their status symbols than punish them for an anti-social purchasing decision they have already made."
Huh? Have you read what you wrote?
As so often, I'm with the cat on this, and I've got size twelve boots!
And Horsey, your objective (which I share) would be achieved by simply booting aviation fuel out of its absurd tax-free haven.
ABSURD! Aviation and marine fuels are EXPLICITLY excluded from the Kyoto Protocol and the matter left to the respective trade organisations - ABSURD!
Grrrr!
ed
And now 10,000 concerned anal orifices are going to fly to Bali to discuss the problem in airconditioned comfort!
I forgot to say
RIGHT ON, Mary!
IH (25)
"...where the old polluting planes are more highly taxed, ..."
Yes, but how 'green' is it to produce a new plane?
I've just noticed that I'd become Marymary!!! I hope you all realise that it's really madmary in disguise.
Thanks Ed (26)
Mary
Fiona and anyone else who has noted that people who buy gasguzzling toadmobiles[*] probably won't mind the extra tax -- I'm not so sure.
I can't be the only person who has noticed, while driving along the motorway at a nice legal 70mph (hem hem), that a lot of the people overtaking me in their big expensive BMWs, Audis and so on are talking on hand-held cellphones as they do so.
It's clear that buying the car has left them so impoverished that they can't afford an extra less than a hundred quid to buy themselves a hands'-free set and comply with the law (and incidentally perhaps save their silly lives). So maybe they won't be able to afford very expensive fuel and tax either. :-)
[*] the word 'toadmobiles' came to me as a typed, and I think it's rather a good word for the things.
Just found you all - heating's low (wouldn't dare do otherwise!) so must have misted up the box.
Sort of agree with lots of things but we still need to get across the message, with incentives or penalties where necessary, that we have simply got to use less, then use it again if we can and, finally, use its component parts again. Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. In that order. (PLEASE excuse the repetition on this.) That means a multi-pronged approach: teaching children that the planet is not some vast goody bag/cesspit; making the greedy feel truly ashamed; and demanding that our 'great leaders' climb off the 'economic growth' platform but look, instead, to sustainability. As far as I'm aware you can't eat, drink or hug wealth or status. Could start with cutting air travel, banning gas-guzzlers, requiring supermarkets to cease over-packaging (or close. Now there's a thought...).
Right. Off the soap-box. For now...!
Well, here's a cat to put amongst the pidgeons - what about the BA aeroplane that has taken off with only a flight crew and cargo on board because, get this, they haven't got enough cabin crew to have customers on the flight. The reason they have to fly the plane is "to minimise the disruption to customers". (As reported on ITV news)
*stands back, having lighted touch paper, to see Ed explode* (Sorry, Ed!!)
Pakistan: Musharraf Cracks Down
Even considers suspending habeas corpus, conducting warrantless wiretaps, torture.
Experts: No Evidence Iran Has Nuclear Weapons Program
White House: unlikely experts would be right two times in a row.
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Dorood/Peace
Namaste -ed
My own business always bores me to death; I prefer other people's.
-- Oscar Wilde
AND YET ANOTHER NEW MESSAGE FROM THE 大象传媒 BLOG HQ:
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /cgi-perl/mt/mt-comments.cgi on this server.
In the interests of reducing consumption I've just acquired a nifty little device called a Wattson (other devices are no doubt available). An induction coil this side of the electricity meter plus a small black box that sends a radio signal to a display that can be put anywhere - I have it in the kitchen where I can watch the numbers go up and down as I switch things on or off. It has the same kind of fascination as watching the washing machine go round but to more purpose. Watch the number shoot up when the kettle goes on or oscillate with the microwave on medium setting (didn't realise that was how it worked).
Every home should have one because if people could actually see how much energy they were using as it happened they'd be far more likely to cut down.
Likewise all cars should have the device which shows not how much petrol is in the tank, but how many miles you can still drive - this works by averaging consumption every few minutes and provides very good positive feedback for smooth, lower speed driving. Would be even better if it could be calibrated against current petrol price to show you the cost as you use it.
Perhaps everyone should also be made to carry one day's water supply, as used by their own household, from a standpipe just to bring home how much of that we use. OK I realise that that's just what happened to some people this summer, but you get the idea.
Alternatively make everyone go camping, old style, carrying water, gathering wood, digging latrines....well perhaps not practical but sadly most folk will probably only appreciate what they've got as we are about to lose it all.
Sorry that's come out more depressing than it started out. I'll go off and lobby for devices such as the Wattson to be fitted to every home.
AnneP - I think the Wattson is a great idea, and I shall get one immediately! I got an Eco-Kettle for Christmas last year too, which allows you to fill and boil only the water you need for each drink, and we've trained all our visitors to use it, which is great.
It might only be a little thing, as is replacing all the lightbulbs, turning the thermostat down and not keeping everything on standby, but if we take them together and more people catch on, it must make a difference, surely?
Perky @ 35 currently:
Our office bought an eco friendly kettle. It lasted 4 months. Hope yours is of a different brand.
BTW, do the train operators have to pay tax on their fuel?
Anne & Perky,
It's a fact that any household which generates even a small amount of its own electricity becomes so sensitised that overall consumption is reduced. The wattson has a similar effect.
My wife's car (skoda) has a readout of (apparently) instantaneous MPG, and it does make me want to see how high I can get it. It also has the option to display average MPG over the period since last reset. I manage at least 10 MPG more than my wife does - (superior smirk)
I've also finally realised that whenever you have to use the brakes, you're throwing away fuel you just used, so no more running up to the 30MPH signs at full speed, more just letting the speed drop, knowing I'm coming to a slower zone...I've turned from a boyracer into a fogey! Pity it took so long.
;-)
ED
One toke over the line, sweet Mary,
One toke over the line,
Sittin' downtown in a railway station,
One toke over the line.
Waitin' for the train that goes home,
Hopin' that the train is on time,
Sittin' downtown in a railway station,
One toke over the line.
Ed, Way back when someone told me to drive on the clutch instead of on the brakes, and it does cut down the fuel consumption more than somewhat if one doesn't drive in a constant race-to-the-line, slam-on-the-anchors style. The interesting thing is that the garage can't believe how far I travel before my brakes need attention, and the clutch is still fine (N-reg car)! And I got taught as a student by poverty and an electricity meter that ate 10p pieces never to boil more water than I actually needed. :-)
I am all in favour of energy-saving light-bulbs too, but they have a serious drawback as far as I am concerned. When they are new, they take no time to speak of before they are bright enough to do things by, but after about three months they start to take longer and longer to 'heat up', as it were, and at the moment the one on the stairs for instance really doesn't give enough light for safe stair-use until it has been on for about five minutes. That in turn means that when I go out I am inclined to leave it on rather than save energy by turning it off, because I don't want to be stuck downstairs when I get home. In my study the same is now happening, and it takes about five minutes before I can read print; so if I am going downstairs for a cuppa I leave it on, whereas before I used to turn the light off as I left the room.
So I am tempted to replace them with new bulbs that give adequate light when they are turned on -- but that would mean new bulbs every four or five months, if this goes on, and that is surely not a good thing.
Are the wretched things going to improve, or is it just inevitable that the bulbs I have to buy by law will be not quite fit for their purpose forever after now?
Well, I am tempted to write a serious comment on this thread.
It is linking up a couple of stories:
(1) the advert for an appointment of a Horizon Gazer, or some such name, last week to attempt to forcast far into the future for government policy.
(2) Fuel prices, food prices, a lack of a national water grid...
Anyway heres a starter for ten: what price does grain have to reach, before someone in Washington or Beijing seriously thinks it is cost-effective to release H5N1 to reduce populations in a third world country, in order for national food prices to be stabalised?
OK, thats cynical.
Would you like to bet the CIA hasnt got a file called $10/ton grain price strategy....
nikki
Chris (38):
For that reason, the stair light is the only main light I don't have an energy saving bulb in. That light doesn't tend to get left on for long, so I'm quite happy to go for the safety of a bright light for a short time rather than the extra saving I'd get otherwise.
In my study, I use halogen desk lamps which give a lovely bright white light even though they're rated at just 11W.
As for boiling kettles, yes absolutely only boil what you need, but be sure to take heed of the minimum level: don't risk boiling your kettle dry.
Of course, if you boil a full kettle in the same room you're in, the heat doesn't go to 'waste'.
xx
ed
Avoid reality at all costs.
Ed @ 41, but the windows steam up. :-(
SSC @ 40, the halogen bulbs thing is a good idea: are they ok to use in an ordinary central ceiling light? And are they still going to be sold in a couple of years time? I use more space than my single desk-lamp lights, so the ceiling one is a must for ordinary use.
One used to be able to get a device to put into a mug of water and heat just that one mug'sworth, to take with one in the car, but I have a feeling it was possible to get burnt on one, and I haven't seen any for sale for ages. That would be a good way to get just one mug of tea or coffee, though. And is there any reason not to measure cold water into a mug, and then boil just that much in the kettle?
Here's a question for someone with a way to measure it: is it more energy-saving to boil a mug'sworth of water in an electric kettle, or in a kettle or a saucepan on the stove, or in the mug in a microwave?
Okay, Fishy (42), what follows is purely empirical. I think that it makes sense but then I am surprised that boiling water freezes quicker than cold water so what do I know?
The most efficient of the three choices would be to put it in an electric kettle. The main reason for this is that the heating element is in direct contact with the water and heats the water first although the heat does get lost by a number of routes. One route is conduction to the containing vessel (the kettle) but if this is made of plastic, then the co-efficient of conductance (rate of energy loss) is less than if you were using a metal container (think saucepan on a cooker hob). The other main energy loss mechanism would be via sub-boiling evaporation of steam. This increases with the ratio of top surface (steam producing) area to volume of liquid. For water boiling in a kettle, this is quite high. However, as the kettle only has a small area (the spout) for the steam to escape much of the energy is re-cycled as the steam is refluxed.
The next best option, I believe, would be the microwave oven. Again the energy source is aimed directly at the water as the microwave source (the magnetron) is tuned to the rotational energy of the water molecule. As long as the mug that you are using is not made of metal, then it should not absorb any energy itself and will only heat up by conduction from the water itself. Some china glazes do absorb small amounts of microwave energy, but this will be very small in comparison to what the water is absorbing. The problem with this method for 鈥渂oiling-the-water-for-what-ever鈥 is that the magnetron fills the oven cavity with energy; the mug of water does not. The energy that does not hit the water is wasted. In fact some of it will get reflected back to the magnetron and damage it. [Note to others 鈥 if your microwave oven is old, it might not have the same power ability that it originally had. Just because it says on the front that it gives 800W, do not trust it. That is why microwavable food providers tell you to check that the food is piping hot before eating. The 鈥渢his power of microwave oven鈥 timing can not be relied upon.] Of the three methods, this has the best top surface to volume ratio so looses least energy by sub-boiling steam production. However, it is the least likely method to try to arrest this loss of energy.
So where does that leave the saucepan or kettle on the hob? The main problem here is that the heat does not go directly to the water. It first has to heat the vessel that holds the water. Indeed, if you have an electric hob at home, as I do, you would have to heat the hob before you heat the vessel containing the water before you heat the water. Each of these steps takes time and is a source of energy loss. The saucepan method will also have the highest steam producing area to volume ratio and so it is the most likely to loose energy by this method. However, a lid on the saucepan would reduce this particular effect by increasing the steam reflux.
Please remember that this is empirical but I hope that you can see where the ideas come from. If you really want to know which is the best method, why not try a small experiment? ;o)
H.
502 @ 21:20
SB 22:00
We are lucky enough to have a huge range cooker which provides lovely hot water, central heating and cooking and a wonderful warm heart to the kitchen in winter. The environment is less lucky since it's gas fired and not as efficient as it might be, being fifteen years old.
I salve my conscience by keeping a kettle on the hotplate and filling the electric kettle from it with just enough water for the number of cups required. It usually boils in seconds.
Life is just one long compromise!
Humph, my fairly long thank-you and further explanation a couple of hours ago has been 502ed and seems to mean it this time, but I do thank you!
Gillian @ 14, that was part of my longer thing that got 502ed for ever.
And making milky drinks in the microwave means one saucepan less to wash up, so I have always done that anyway and it's good to be told it's more energy-efficient in both ways instead of only the one.