As the global recession takes hold...bugger the environment

In the current issue of Private Eye there is a cartoon in which the EU environment ministers re-assess climate targets. "Great! We can dump these targets that we were never going to meet and blame the banks".

On the same page there is an article about Gordon Brown campaigning to get the price per litre of fuel reduced, yet high fuel prices really were causing people to re-think their driving habits even before the banking system went tits up and people started feeling financially vulnerable.

As we know living in an ethical and environmentally friendly manner can be achieved fairly easily by those who can afford it, but with a recession the number of people who feel that they can afford the luxury of prolonging human existence on the planet beyond their lifetime will surely reduce.

Of course it doesn't need to be expensive to be green, but it takes more effort to do it on the cheap. Let's hope the cause doesn't get forgotten as world governments scramble to find ways to restore the reckless standard of living that their populations have become accustomed.

The Success of Green Marketing

I've recently spent a little time lurking around the Friends of the Earth forum. Now you would think that the people who post there would be fairly clued up on the type of issues that we concern ourselves with over here at Earth Dream but my God are there some easily fooled (environ)mentalists out there.

OK so it would be a sweeping generalisation to suggest that even the majority of posters follow any sort of stereotype but there is a significant minority that inspired this update.

Here are a few pointers:

Just because something sounds like your message is getting through it doesn't mean that it is. Case in point the widely lauded move by Marks and Spencer to start charging for plastic carrier bags. Hello, is this not a classic case of profiteering masked as environmentalism. OK so they aren't keeping the 5p's and are apparently giving them to environmental charities - but does anyone really think this is anything more than a marketing policy designed to appeal to the mostly middle class middle england environmentalism-lite politics of it's current consumer base, get a few positive news stories published in the media and hopefully attract a few people into the stores that might normally shop elsewhere? For the record M&S generally aren't that bad a retailer, just look into the welfare of the animals used to make their food.

Likewise Mayor Ken and his green congestion charge in London. Does anyone really believe that putting a big charge on certain types of car to drive in the city is anything other than a political gesture? Look beneath the surface and you'll find that you can still buy a huge 4x4 that averages 20mpg (less in London) but because it has a bit of a battery in it it's technically a hybrid so exempt from charges - any sensible "green tax" would surely cover a machine such as this which is a Gas Guzzler by any definition.

The whole thing is a bit of spin directed at people that aren't usually part of Red Ken's general voting demographic and is actually damaging as it makes people believe something is being done about green issues when in fact it's a self serving cover up. And only having Roller's on the streets of London is good for the capitals image I guess. Even if they have stuck a minicab licence on the back to avoid the charge.