Junkk Male’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  What goes down...

  Sticking stuff underground (especially to get useable stuff up/out) has an obvious attraction.

  When I was a kid I wondered why we couldn't just tip all our waste into volcanoes, so the lava would take it to the earth's core, melt it all down and separate it all back into its basic chemical and ores again. Wouldn't that be neat?

  But I'm just wondering about the consequences of mucking about with the balance of flowing (virtue of heat that is proposed to be removed?) magma, which by the numbers seems so vast anything we do will be very small, but may still be significant.

  As one who thought it a stretch when some laid the Asian tsunami at the door of global warming, I was nonetheless moved to at least wonder a tad by subsequent theories based on the consequences of climate change on the ocean floors, and even sucking vast volumes of oil out of the ground.

  How sure are we that our demands won't divert enough energy from down there to up here to not have a consequence?

  I guess after nuclear I'm just worried that in our desire for more sources of energy rather than using less, we tend to rush into things that may cause a few new problems down the line. But then I was the one who wondered what sucking the energy out of the wind at coastlines may do for inland climate balances.

  Just asking. I'd love to be reassured.

  Junkk.com Discover - Share - Create with YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL MATES! Read the `Best of the World Blogs'-listed Junkk Male RE:View

  On Geothermal energy posted 3 years, 3 months ago 7 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Turf Wars - Green Side Down?

  I don't want to seem a Groucho, but to quote Mr. Marx the eldest, I often feel 'I wouldn't want to join any club that would have me as a member'.

  It's always sad when something so fundamentally `good', such as anything that's not just talking about trying to save the planet but actually doing something (I'm big on tangibles) gets compromised - to any degree - by... talking. But I guess we all can't resist having opinions. So I simply advocate the notion of `whatever works!', which does not exclude constructive criticism.

  Freecycle is a true phenomenon, and certainly already has a firm foothold here in the UK. It is also about the only serious such initiative around that I'm aware of - not counting our little JunnkYard.

  I'm pretty sure all the corporate, legalistic shenanigans would and possibly could not occur here, but we'll see. Academic anyway, as it hardly affects anything.

  The issue seems to be cultural. Personally I had trouble (hey, ours is not perfect and we're always working on it... funds permitting) coping with the system Freecycle used/s and have given up with it. But a lot do. So if asked we will happily advocate trying JunkkYard AND Freecycle (and now a few others this post has made me aware of, if they are over here). Why not? They're both free, not exclusive and achieve the same result. And we gain from being helpful all round, so with luck will get revisited. So what is being defended here?

  As a consumer you go where you feel comfortable. In the UK I sensed the same 'clique' tensions creeping in. When I could be bothered to read the vast numbers of daily emails, there'd often be sniping going on. Why so heavy? Who needs it?

  For sure we're keen to create a community, and there is a Forum for people to engage, but mostly it's just a tool. Like some others mentioned, our model is much more Google or eBay. Donor/Beneficiary. Post/Surf. Offer/Collect. Beyond providing the matchmaking mechanism (and enjoying passive exposure to the traffic created) what other involvement is required?

  We opened from day one with our hearts on our sleeves... well, our business model up there on our banners.

  Much like Anita Roddick's sale of Body Shop, if you start as one thing, you can probably expect to cop some flak when you try and change the fundamentals. Especially having established with a super-ethical `no money involved' stance, to trying to turn a buck, even if it's just to keep funding the whole shebang. And moving from voluntary to sponsored will put a few supporters' noses out. Sadly the whole e-movement can be quite `purist' in approach when it comes to making green, and beyond grubby money, standards of hotly  advocated 'best practice' (who decides?) can also often alienate those who are a lighter shade and lives to get on with.

  Frankly I can't quite see what's the problem (being commercial that is). However, being uber-precious and especially getting the shark suits involved does not seem productive. I wonder who funds this aspect? And why? Does this suggest a another, possibly more financially-aspirational agenda?

  If it is, consumer preferences and market forces will decide. Welcome to the club.

  Junkk.com Discover - Share - Create with YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL MATES! Read the `Best of the World Blogs'-listed Junkk Male RE:View

  On freecycle: TM, and R.I.P. posted 3 years, 3 months ago 31 Responses