Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx

My report said

1) My home, for heating and hot water is 20% below the national average. And
so it should be. My house is well insulated and I do not like it too warm.

2) My appliances create 2 times the national average of CO2 (I doubt that. I
have no TV, one computer on 24/7, CCTV on 24/7 and I use the washing
machine, dishwasher, cooker when needed)

3) my travel footprint is 3 times the national average. I also doubt that.

The action plan Action CO2 gave me is crap.

a) fit draught-proofing around doors and window.

Why? All my exterior doors and windows are double-glazed.

b) Install underfloor insulation

Nice, but I have concrete floors. ActionCO2 never asked about my floors
before suggesting that.

c) Replace your fridge and freezer with a more efficient model

Will that help?

My fridge is 3 years old and is A rated, my freezer is a little older, maybe
6 years old. It is second hand (my Grandad gave it to me) and I think it is
B rated. Will rushing out to but a new A+++ rated freezer save on CO2
emissions. I cannot see the total CO2 emissions on the manufacture of a new
freezer plus the CO2 costs of disposing of the old recycled freezer will
have a pay back of less than 10 years.

d) In dry weather use an outside line rather than your dyer

I did tick the box that said I did that already. I tend to use the drier
when it is raining, but then only when needed eg I wash all my work clothes
in one wash on a Friday night. 5 Tshirts or jumpers and 3 pairs of trousers.
If I need a pair of work clothes for Saturday morning I might need the
dryer. Even then I only dry one pair in it.

e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest CO2
model in its category

Yes but a 1.7D van is almost certainly a 1.7D van. There is not much to
choose from.

f) Whenever possible, walk, bike, car share, or use public transport

I do walk to the local shops if just for fags or beer etc. Even better is
the short cut. If I enter the Kings Head by the side door and leave via the
front door I save 20 metres by cutting a corner out. It takes a little
longer timewise but it is worth it. I do drive to do the weekly shop even
though the local supermarket is less than a mile away. Who can pick up a
full weekly shopping basket with just two arms? Diet coke and cat food are
rather bulky.

I cannot use public transport to get to work and back as I have a large
collection of tools, cables etc that I need for work. I think the bus driver
would complain if it took me 20 minutes to get on board the bus. And buses
do not have roof bars for my ladders.

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

Adam

ARWadworth coughed up some electrons that declared:

Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx

My report said

1) My home, for heating and hot water is 20% below the national average.
And so it should be. My house is well insulated and I do not like it too
warm.

2) My appliances create 2 times the national average of CO2 (I doubt that.
I have no TV, one computer on 24/7, CCTV on 24/7 and I use the washing
machine, dishwasher, cooker when needed)

3) my travel footprint is 3 times the national average. I also doubt that.

The action plan Action CO2 gave me is crap.

a) fit draught-proofing around doors and window.

Why? All my exterior doors and windows are double-glazed.

b) Install underfloor insulation

Nice, but I have concrete floors. ActionCO2 never asked about my floors
before suggesting that.

c) Replace your fridge and freezer with a more efficient model

Will that help?

My fridge is 3 years old and is A rated, my freezer is a little older,
maybe 6 years old. It is second hand (my Grandad gave it to me) and I
think it is B rated. Will rushing out to but a new A+++ rated freezer save
on CO2 emissions. I cannot see the total CO2 emissions on the manufacture
of a new freezer plus the CO2 costs of disposing of the old recycled
freezer will have a pay back of less than 10 years.

d) In dry weather use an outside line rather than your dyer

I did tick the box that said I did that already. I tend to use the drier
when it is raining, but then only when needed eg I wash all my work
clothes in one wash on a Friday night. 5 Tshirts or jumpers and 3 pairs of
trousers. If I need a pair of work clothes for Saturday morning I might
need the dryer. Even then I only dry one pair in it.

e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest
CO2 model in its category

Yes but a 1.7D van is almost certainly a 1.7D van. There is not much to
choose from.

f) Whenever possible, walk, bike, car share, or use public transport

I do walk to the local shops if just for fags or beer etc. Even better is
the short cut. If I enter the Kings Head by the side door and leave via
the front door I save 20 metres by cutting a corner out. It takes a little
longer timewise but it is worth it. I do drive to do the weekly shop even
though the local supermarket is less than a mile away. Who can pick up a
full weekly shopping basket with just two arms? Diet coke and cat food are
rather bulky.

I cannot use public transport to get to work and back as I have a large
collection of tools, cables etc that I need for work. I think the bus
driver would complain if it took me 20 minutes to get on board the bus.
And buses do not have roof bars for my ladders.

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

Adam

Just had a "discussion" with SWMBO concerning "the new religion". I hate
having crap shoved down my throat by self-righteous zealots as much as the
next (wo)man and I really think this is where we are at with green issues.
People should be shown what is worthwhile doing with good factual
illustrations, not force fed the fad of the day with nothing to back it up.

My daughter is being taught to recycle at school, which, at here age, I
aplaude. But I tried a little though experiment on her (she's 4). I showed
her a package from Tescos. It was a little cardboard box of pills encased
in a plastic "clam shell". I cut off the clam shell and asked her what she
thought about it. Reply: "Recycle it Daddy". I said "good", "but how about
if it wasn't made in the first place?" "Carboard comes from trees and you
can grow new trees, but plastic is made from oil which is a precious
resource which cannot readily be regenerated". "Why did they put a nice
little cardboard box that worked perfectly well in a silly plastic shell
whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before I chuck it in the bin?"

I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
trouble if she does ;-

Cheers

Tim

--

Anti FUD, not anti-environment

I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
trouble if she does ;-

Cheers

Tim

--

Anti FUD, not anti-environment

Are you saying that the benefits of recycling are overstated (re.
"good factual illustrations"), or that it's better not to produce the
stuff in the first place, or both?

I agree that it's better not to spend energy producing unnecessary
stuff, but recycling is a pragmatic thing, isn't it? At least, I
assume that persuading people to do without stuff is a lot harder than
persuading them to dispose of it in a different way.

BlueJohn coughed up some electrons that declared:

I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
trouble if she does ;-

Cheers

Tim

--

Anti FUD, not anti-environment

Are you saying that the benefits of recycling are overstated (re.
"good factual illustrations"), or that it's better not to produce the
stuff in the first place, or both?

The latter to a larger extent. Or to put it another way, recycling is a
pointless exercise comparatively if you're being totally wasteful to start
with. IMHO people should remain aware of the wider picture, and not be
blinkered into a limited course of action, which is what I perceive to be
happening (maybe wrongly) in a larger part of society.

I agree that it's better not to spend energy producing unnecessary
stuff, but recycling is a pragmatic thing, isn't it? At least, I
assume that persuading people to do without stuff is a lot harder than
persuading them to dispose of it in a different way.

Not quite - in the case of the plastic clam shell, I can see no reason for
it to exist. It's an annoyance to me, the cardboard box it's containing
serves the purpose very well anyway *and* I have to dispose of it. Same goes
for multiple layers of plastic on foodstuffs (sausages are just fine in a
bit of waxed paper, they do NOT require a silly polystyrene tray, cling
film and cardboard wrap).

I'd prefer products to be made to last, the antithesis of the consumerist
society. I'd prefer to telecommute part time, but my employers historically
wouldn't countenance it, despite the job (sysadmin) being eminently suited.

There's lots of things that could be made better for the environment without
giving up stuff, but none of it is quite as easy as banning GLS bulbs from
the government's POV.

Cheers

Tim

In article ,
Tim S wrote:
"Why did they put a nice little cardboard box that worked perfectly well
in a silly plastic shell whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before
I chuck it in the bin?"

One reason would be to prevent tampering.

There seems to be a fashion to open up just about anything you can - and
then not buy it. Or nick something from it.

--
*Toilet stolen from police station. Cops have nothing to go on.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim S wrote:
"Why did they put a nice little cardboard box that worked perfectly well
in a silly plastic shell whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before
I chuck it in the bin?"

One reason would be to prevent tampering.

There seems to be a fashion to open up just about anything you can - and
then not buy it. Or nick something from it.

Probably follows the manufacturers' fashion of putting things like these
(below) on boxes:

Contents may differ from picture
Colour White/Grey/Black/Blue/Red
110-120V 60Hz

Indeed, just the other day, we wished to buy a small roll of cheap
plastic bags. The box said "small plastic bags" - without any indication
of actual size. There were around half a dozen opened and/or resealed
boxes on the shelf. :-)

Mor eseriously, I do agree. There do appear to be more (or more active)
tamperers/fiddlers/bit nickers.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

Rod wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim S wrote:
"Why did they put a nice little cardboard box that worked perfectly well
in a silly plastic shell whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before
I chuck it in the bin?"

One reason would be to prevent tampering.

There seems to be a fashion to open up just about anything you can - and
then not buy it. Or nick something from it.

Probably follows the manufacturers' fashion of putting things like these
(below) on boxes:

Contents may differ from picture
Colour White/Grey/Black/Blue/Red
110-120V 60Hz

Indeed, just the other day, we wished to buy a small roll of cheap
plastic bags. The box said "small plastic bags" - without any indication
of actual size. There were around half a dozen opened and/or resealed
boxes on the shelf. :-)

Mor eseriously, I do agree. There do appear to be more (or more active)
tamperers/fiddlers/bit nickers.

Not surprising when,because of the cost of the packaging, only complete
kits of anything are for sale. you cant get spare parts.

See my posts a few months back on trying to get a Sunvic RECEIVER or
even a BOARD for it for a wireless stat.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:49:27 +0100, Rod
wrote:


Probably follows the manufacturers' fashion of putting things like these
(below) on boxes:

Contents may differ from picture
Colour White/Grey/Black/Blue/Red
110-120V 60Hz

Indeed, just the other day, we wished to buy a small roll of cheap
plastic bags. The box said "small plastic bags" - without any indication
of actual size. There were around half a dozen opened and/or resealed
boxes on the shelf. :-)


Does anybody else have the feeling that the stuff you buy in shops
actually costs approximately nothing, all you are paying for is the
cost of advertising, marketing and sales.

I first came to this conclusion years ago when I saw a pair of Chinese
copy mole grips in the £1.00 bin at the petrol station. It would cost
Ca. £10.00 for me to package and ship an item like that to the next
town

-and they had come from China.

Derek

In article ,
Derek Geldard wrote:
Does anybody else have the feeling that the stuff you buy in shops
actually costs approximately nothing, all you are paying for is the
cost of advertising, marketing and sales.

I first came to this conclusion years ago when I saw a pair of Chinese
copy mole grips in the £1.00 bin at the petrol station. It would cost
Ca. £10.00 for me to package and ship an item like that to the next
town

Is that in Harrods gift paper and same day delivery?

UK second class post and a jiffy bag - less than a fiver.

-and they had come from China.

But likely in a container by sea. Which is extremely cheap.

--
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Derek Geldard wrote:
On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:49:27 +0100, Rod
wrote:


Probably follows the manufacturers' fashion of putting things like these
(below) on boxes:

Contents may differ from picture
Colour White/Grey/Black/Blue/Red
110-120V 60Hz

Indeed, just the other day, we wished to buy a small roll of cheap
plastic bags. The box said "small plastic bags" - without any indication
of actual size. There were around half a dozen opened and/or resealed
boxes on the shelf. :-)


Does anybody else have the feeling that the stuff you buy in shops
actually costs approximately nothing, all you are paying for is the
cost of advertising, marketing and sales.


Yes. Its another form of wealth redistribution, characteristic in an
economy with an excess of cash.


I first came to this conclusion years ago when I saw a pair of Chinese
copy mole grips in the £1.00 bin at the petrol station. It would cost
Ca. £10.00 for me to package and ship an item like that to the next
town

-and they had come from China.


Screw by the kilogram in brown paper bags will come back, for sure..



Derek

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:01:05 +0100, Derek Geldard
wrote:

Does anybody else have the feeling that the stuff you buy in shops
actually costs approximately nothing, all you are paying for is the
cost of advertising, marketing and sales.

I first came to this conclusion years ago when I saw a pair of Chinese
copy mole grips in the £1.00 bin at the petrol station. It would cost
Ca. £10.00 for me to package and ship an item like that to the next
town

-and they had come from China.


There was a bloke on Dragons Den last week demonstrating a very nice
device that detects a bath overflow working and instantly turns both
bath taps off. The point was it was mechanical and no electric
involved. It looked a really good gadget. Unfortunately he said it
would be made in China for £5 and sold for £60.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

There seems to be a fashion to open up just about anything you can - and
then not buy it. Or nick something from it.

Or poison it.

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 17:29:50 +0100, Tim S wrote:

ARWadworth coughed up some electrons that declared:

Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx

My report said

1) My home, for heating and hot water is 20% below the national average.
And so it should be. My house is well insulated and I do not like it too
warm.

2) My appliances create 2 times the national average of CO2 (I doubt that.
I have no TV, one computer on 24/7, CCTV on 24/7 and I use the washing
machine, dishwasher, cooker when needed)

3) my travel footprint is 3 times the national average. I also doubt that.

The action plan Action CO2 gave me is crap.

a) fit draught-proofing around doors and window.

Why? All my exterior doors and windows are double-glazed.

b) Install underfloor insulation

Nice, but I have concrete floors. ActionCO2 never asked about my floors
before suggesting that.

c) Replace your fridge and freezer with a more efficient model

Will that help?

My fridge is 3 years old and is A rated, my freezer is a little older,
maybe 6 years old. It is second hand (my Grandad gave it to me) and I
think it is B rated. Will rushing out to but a new A+++ rated freezer save
on CO2 emissions. I cannot see the total CO2 emissions on the manufacture
of a new freezer plus the CO2 costs of disposing of the old recycled
freezer will have a pay back of less than 10 years.

d) In dry weather use an outside line rather than your dyer

I did tick the box that said I did that already. I tend to use the drier
when it is raining, but then only when needed eg I wash all my work
clothes in one wash on a Friday night. 5 Tshirts or jumpers and 3 pairs of
trousers. If I need a pair of work clothes for Saturday morning I might
need the dryer. Even then I only dry one pair in it.

e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest
CO2 model in its category

Yes but a 1.7D van is almost certainly a 1.7D van. There is not much to
choose from.

f) Whenever possible, walk, bike, car share, or use public transport

I do walk to the local shops if just for fags or beer etc. Even better is
the short cut. If I enter the Kings Head by the side door and leave via
the front door I save 20 metres by cutting a corner out. It takes a little
longer timewise but it is worth it. I do drive to do the weekly shop even
though the local supermarket is less than a mile away. Who can pick up a
full weekly shopping basket with just two arms? Diet coke and cat food are
rather bulky.

I cannot use public transport to get to work and back as I have a large
collection of tools, cables etc that I need for work. I think the bus
driver would complain if it took me 20 minutes to get on board the bus.
And buses do not have roof bars for my ladders.

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

Adam

Just had a "discussion" with SWMBO concerning "the new religion". I hate
having crap shoved down my throat by self-righteous zealots as much as the
next (wo)man and I really think this is where we are at with green issues.
People should be shown what is worthwhile doing with good factual
illustrations, not force fed the fad of the day with nothing to back it up.

My daughter is being taught to recycle at school, which, at here age, I
aplaude. But I tried a little though experiment on her (she's 4). I showed
her a package from Tescos. It was a little cardboard box of pills encased
in a plastic "clam shell". I cut off the clam shell and asked her what she
thought about it. Reply: "Recycle it Daddy". I said "good", "but how about
if it wasn't made in the first place?" "Carboard comes from trees and you
can grow new trees, but plastic is made from oil which is a precious
resource which cannot readily be regenerated". "Why did they put a nice
little cardboard box that worked perfectly well in a silly plastic shell
whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before I chuck it in the bin?"

I suggested we should jointly write a letter to the manufacturers asking
them not to be so wasteful. Also suggested she ask her teacher if not
making something unnecessary is better that recycling. I'm going to be in
trouble if she does ;-

Many people seem to forget about the 3 "R"s: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle.
Recycle is the last of them and should only be there if Reduction or
Reuse is not possible.

IOW: There's much too much emphasis on Recycling.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

"Tim S" wrote in message
...
....
My daughter is being taught to recycle at school, which, at here age, I
aplaude. But I tried a little though experiment on her (she's 4). I showed
her a package from Tescos. It was a little cardboard box of pills encased
in a plastic "clam shell". I cut off the clam shell and asked her what she
thought about it. Reply: "Recycle it Daddy". I said "good", "but how about
if it wasn't made in the first place?" "Carboard comes from trees and you
can grow new trees, but plastic is made from oil which is a precious
resource which cannot readily be regenerated".

The technology for using algae to convert human and animal waste to oil has
been around for decades. However, at present, it is a lot easier and cheaper
to extract the stuff from the ground, so the process has not been refined
into a commercially viable operation.

"Why did they put a nice
little cardboard box that worked perfectly well in a silly plastic shell
whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before I chuck it in the bin?"

The shells are optional extras on many goods and are classed as anti-tamper
devices. They stop people damaging goods by opening them and also stop
people stealing the contents, but leaving the empty box on the shelf.

Colin Bignell

nightjar cpb@ wrote:
"Tim S" wrote in message
...
...
My daughter is being taught to recycle at school, which, at here age, I
aplaude. But I tried a little though experiment on her (she's 4). I showed
her a package from Tescos. It was a little cardboard box of pills encased
in a plastic "clam shell". I cut off the clam shell and asked her what she
thought about it. Reply: "Recycle it Daddy". I said "good", "but how about
if it wasn't made in the first place?" "Carboard comes from trees and you
can grow new trees, but plastic is made from oil which is a precious
resource which cannot readily be regenerated".

The technology for using algae to convert human and animal waste to oil has
been around for decades. However, at present, it is a lot easier and cheaper
to extract the stuff from the ground, so the process has not been refined
into a commercially viable operation.

"Why did they put a nice
little cardboard box that worked perfectly well in a silly plastic shell
whose sole purpose is to cut my fingers before I chuck it in the bin?"

The shells are optional extras on many goods and are classed as anti-tamper
devices. They stop people damaging goods by opening them and also stop
people stealing the contents, but leaving the empty box on the shelf.


Oh for the days when there were no shelves that customers could get to:
you went to a counter, and stated your problem, and the man behind who
actually knew what he was selling went and got it from a stre-room.

I bought a ladder standoff tis week. It came fully assembled, wrapped in
bubble wrap and packing tape. Not a hint of a manufacturer, not a hint
of cardboard or vac forming..great!


Colin Bignell

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 09:48:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Oh for the days when there were no shelves that customers could get to:
you went to a counter, and stated your problem, and the man behind who
actually knew what he was selling went and got it from a stre-room.

Four candles?

:-)

--
Frank Erskine

"ARWadworth" wrote in message
om...
Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx

My report said


Well oddly enough mine said the same. We never go on holiday so never fly
and my car is a clio - so small is its middle name . The clobber me on my
home yet its double glazed, insulated to the hilt ( not underfloor
heating - not feasable) and still it seems I am above the national average
on usage ( and lets not count right now my faulty heaters which havent been
on for yonks so I have no heating in the house and am only using a few units
a day energy.

I use my dishwasher three times a week. I use my washing machine once a week
and my dryer only when I have to ( rarely). I have no appliances other than
a TV and a computer ( one of each which are off more than on.

Despite all of this my home ( 2 bed bungalow) comes out at above the
national average even though my appliances are using less than half the
national average according to them.

Its total ********. I have to save and bring my foot pront down to 7 tons
even though I am already below the national average by their own
calculations.

I am inclined to use a little more and tell them to boil their heads.

I cannot use public transport to get to work and back as I have a large
collection of tools, cables etc that I need for work. I think the bus
driver would complain if it took me 20 minutes to get on board the bus.
And buses do not have roof bars for my ladders.

Neither can I. There is no public transport where I live. I would have to
walk five miles to get to a bus or train with all my things every morning.
They are simply not being realisitic.
I suppose they want everyone to work from home at being a web designer so
they dont have to go out. is that it?

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

yes absolutely.

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:11:14 UTC, "endymion"
wrote:

Despite all of this my home ( 2 bed bungalow) comes out at above the
national average even though my appliances are using less than half the
national average according to them.

Its total ********. I have to save and bring my foot pront down to 7 tons
even though I am already below the national average by their own
calculations.

Typical case of lying with statistics! Not sure if this was mentioned
recently here, but anyway:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7581120.stm

I particularly like the (true) statement that most people have an above
average number of feet!

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:11:14 UTC, "endymion"
wrote:

Despite all of this my home ( 2 bed bungalow) comes out at above the
national average even though my appliances are using less than half the
national average according to them.

Its total ********. I have to save and bring my foot pront down to 7 tons
even though I am already below the national average by their own
calculations.

Typical case of lying with statistics! Not sure if this was mentioned
recently here, but anyway:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7581120.stm

I particularly like the (true) statement that most people have an above
average number of feet!

Medians and means.

12 inches is not always a rule.

Adam

endymion wrote:

Despite all of this my home ( 2 bed bungalow) comes out at above the
national average even though my appliances are using less than half the
national average according to them.

Bungalows lose more heat per m² than other comparable houses; they have
a lot of exposed areas.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have you strayed"?

ARWadworth wrote:
Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

snip

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

Adam

It's just told me that I'm producing 25 tonnes of CO2 every year - what a
crock of ****e....that's over 68 Kg of CO2 every day

--
Phil L
RSRL Tipster Of The Year 2008

"ARWadworth" wrote in message
om...
Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx


Our 2 person household is 7.41 against a national average of 9.96 tonnes per
year.
Does that give me the right to walk around with my holier than thou nose in
the air?

How the **** I am going to get it all into footballs is beyond me though
TBH.

"R D S" wrote in message
...

"ARWadworth" wrote in message
om...
Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx

just tried it, we dont drink tea or coffee so never boil a kettle, but i had
to tell them that i did,
dont have a dishwasher yet told to buy one... because one full load a day is
better than loads of bowls of hot water!!! one bowl of hot water does all
our plates (16 piece) and the washing up gets done twice a week,

underfloor insulation again, they never heard of concrete floors i guess,

Since we moved in here, we've had no kitchen as i'm re-doing it, so we have
no cooker, and are using the microwave for all our meals, yet it tells me to
use the microwave more because its more efficiant that a conventional
oven... waht conventional oven, we dont have one.

i'm to turn the thermostat down by one degree... havent bloody got one,
well, only the one on the combi boiler which senses water temp i believe.

and i'm to walk and use public transport more,
it's a mile walk to the bus stop from my house, having arthritis this is a
bit far for me to walk, and when i get there it's at least 2 quid to go into
town,
i can ride the motorbike into town, park for free, and come home for about
30p's worth of petrol.

I'm going to do another carbon calc for my motorhome next, that'll screw
things up,
got underfloor insulation.. the entire shell is a sandwich of wood,
polystyrene and alli,
got solar panels (pv) that produce all the power i need to run everything in
the van,
i get hot water as i drive along from the coolant loop from the engine to
the calorifier,
The washing machine in there is an A++ rated one, uses 30 litres of water
per wash and is fed with warm water using the free hot water from the
engine, and the electric to run it comes from the batteries, charged up from
the solar panels of the engines alternator when i'm driving.
The heating is from a diesel fired eberspacher, which also heats the hot
water calorifier up if needed, uses a max of 1 litre an hour, but only runs
for about 5 to 7 minutes per 30 minutes to keep the van at 23 degrees C.

I've got a microwave in the van, but using that more means i'd have to run
the genny or engine to re-charge the batteries, (can use it for 15 minutes a
day without it affecting the power levels from the solar charge the next
day)

And i bet it can't handle the fact that whilst i'm producing carbon from
driving it, at the same time i'm heating the hot water up for showers and
washing up later on, and producing upto 165 amps of power for re-charging
the batteries, which means a couple of hours totally re-charges the battery
bank, where as it takes almost a day on mains hookup using power station
generatored power.

"gazz" wrote in message
...

i'm to turn the thermostat down by one degree... havent bloody got one,
well, only the one on the combi boiler which senses water temp i believe.

Well you will save a lot more if you have a proper control system.
Its bad enough that some systems were not fitted with room stats decades
ago, to not have one on a combi system is poor.
Are you sure you don't have one?

I'm fairly average. But I did some digging. It doesn't care how much
you use the train, your CO2 figure is the same. All those long distance
commuters will be pleased. I imagine the rest is as bad. After all,
how much difference does that mobile phone charger really make when I
forget to unplug it?

Andy

Andy Champ wrote:
I'm fairly average. But I did some digging. It doesn't care how much
you use the train, your CO2 figure is the same. All those long
distance commuters will be pleased. I imagine the rest is as bad. After
all, how much difference does that mobile phone charger really
make when I forget to unplug it?

The real problem here is that the environmental industry thinks this survey
is the mutts nuts. Ergo politicians will accept it as kosher & start making
short term vote catching policy & tax changes as a result.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
...
I'm fairly average. But I did some digging. It doesn't care how much you
use the train, your CO2 figure is the same. All those long distance
commuters will be pleased. I imagine the rest is as bad. After all, how
much difference does that mobile phone charger really make when I forget
to unplug it?

Andy

I have tried again.

This time I filled the ticks in on the form that said that I drive like an
idiot with exessive breaking etc, left all my computers on and all my
chargers in 24/7.

Guess what? My action plan is the same

Buy a new freezer and take my washing out to dry (which I do if it is not
raining)

Adam

"R D S" wrote in message
...

"ARWadworth" wrote in message
om...
Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx


Our 2 person household is 7.41 against a national average of 9.96 tonnes
per year.
Does that give me the right to walk around with my holier than thou nose
in the air?


I am still trying to work out how we use so much quite frankly according to
them. Two of us. I run a dishwasher when full - three times a week. Washing
machine once a week. I cook once a week and microwave the rest of it (
dinners that is). One meal a day for two people.

I havent got the heating on right now . I have one computer on about three
hours a day. One TV on about two hours a day ( or less week days - just to
watch the news). We dont go on holiday. Lights are only on in one room
at night . I do have a night light because I suffer from congestion ( post
pneumonia) and like to be able to get up without fumbling around in the
dark if I need to. The house is so sealed/insulated that it has rampant
condensation right now with the weather as it is! So much for insulation.

The only thing I have is a small car to go to work three times a week and
shopping on my way home. I cant use public transport, there is none and
anyway we dont go out that often.

Yet I am supposed to reduce my water heater ( reduce it anymore and it will
be cold!) Dry outside ( I do) put under floor heating in. ( no way that can
be achieved here) and run a smaller car ( I run a small car).

I think its fixed. I think they are saying the same for everyone.

"endymion" wrote in message
...

"R D S" wrote in message
...

"ARWadworth" wrote in message
om...
Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx


Our 2 person household is 7.41 against a national average of 9.96 tonnes
per year.
Does that give me the right to walk around with my holier than thou nose
in the air?


I am still trying to work out how we use so much quite frankly according
to them. Two of us. I run a dishwasher when full - three times a week.
Washing machine once a week. I cook once a week and microwave the rest of
it ( dinners that is). One meal a day for two people.

I was asked if I had a microwave and nothing else was asked about it. I have
not used it once this year, so how does that fit into the calculations?

Adam

Just filled in ours and came up with the following.

Home Appliances Travel
Total
Carbon Footprint 11.96 1.57 5.91 19.44
Target Footprint 9.57 1.26 4.73
15.56 (That would be for the UK?)
National Average 4.53 1.62 3.81
9.96 (UK?)

But I'm in eastern Canada. And guessing mine is low.

This is an insulated 'stick built' (wood frame etc.) all electric
house about 40 years old. Four bed About 1600 sq. feet, plus an
attached garage/storeroom that are unheated 99% of time. And with now
only one occupant (myself) most of the time.

If was built today these walls etc. would be two inches thicker and
much more heavily insulated to what is called R2000. That standard is
for a well sealed structure with an electric powered air/heat
exchanger. This house is still 'leaky enough' to not to require an
electrically driven exchanger. Exchangers which incidentally run
continuously.

Most of the electricity here is hydro produced, except for a small
amount of peak demand for heating mid winter which is from an oil
fired power station.

Within this house most of the 'wasted' heat from appliances such as
fridges, incandescent light bulbs etc. helps heat the house. Most
months of the year in this cool climate require some heating, usually
at night when lights are likely to be on anyway.

In this part of North America (unlike further south or in the interior
of the continent) we don't need or even own an air conditioner,
although do run a dehumidifier most months except the coldest and
driest in the basement workshop. We use reconditioned 48 inch
commercial fluorescents for areas where lights are on for long periods
such as kitchen, workshop etc.

Will admit to travel on an average once every couple of years, last
few years, long distance return, air flight! Of course while doing so
the house heating is virtually off at around 50 degrees F! With the
electric hot water tank and water pressure also off (just in case)
that alone saving probably some 25 - 30 cents of electricity per day.

We do occasionally use a basement wood stove burning scrap wood that
would otherwise go to the tip. Also during the 40 years we have
planted and grown some 67 trees on this half acre many of which are
now 30+ feet high. So they absorb carbon; right? We also own some 6
-7 acres of occasionally used fairly heavily treed woodland which also
are busy absorbing carbon, growing falling or blowing down and then
rotting and their nutrients returning to the soil.

So what are we doing right or wrong?

Oh btw our average daily consumption right now is around 44 kilowatt
hours per day. Annually it averages about 70 k.w.hr per day. The
outside temp right now (Sept 17th) is about 9 degrees C (roughly 49 F.
Low wind) average cost of domestic electrcity is about ten cents
(roughly 5p) per kilowatt hour or unit. No heat per-se on at all,
house is being warmed by miscellaneous lights, two PCs running
continuously, cooking etc.

Cheers.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "R D S" saying
something like:

Our 2 person household is 7.41 against a national average of 9.96 tonnes per
year.

1.39 tonnes for a 5-bed fully insulated detached house with various heat
inputs and free biomass.
At least, when it's completed...
Right now, it's considerably more than that.
--
Dave
GS850x2 XS650 SE6a

"It's a moron working with power tools.
How much more suspenseful can you get?"
- House

ARWadworth wrote:

Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

Not until you mentioned it...

I just tried out http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carboncalc/html/index.aspx

Yup gave it a whirl...

Apparently we are producing 20 tonnes vs the "average" 16...

3) my travel footprint is 3 times the national average. I also doubt that.

It asks if you live in a rural location, then fails to take that into
account on the journey questions - e.g. like using the car for journeys
of up to a mile - erm, unless I was visiting a neighbour, that would not
get me anywhere useful!

The action plan Action CO2 gave me is crap.

It seems to parrot the same platitudes regardless of what info you give it.

b) Install underfloor insulation

Yup got that as well. It did not comment on the stone age boiler, but
did suggest ripping and replacing the fridge!

save on CO2 emissions. I cannot see the total CO2 emissions on the
manufacture of a new freezer plus the CO2 costs of disposing of the old
recycled freezer will have a pay back of less than 10 years.

Indeed - something they often seem to ignore.

e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest
CO2 model in its category

Assumes one wants to drive something tiny and slow... I think I would
rather skip the summer flight to the med! (again)

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

I concur...



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"John Rumm" wrote in message
et...

e) When replacing the car (van in my case) consider choosing the lowest
CO2 model in its category

Assumes one wants to drive something tiny and slow... I think I would
rather skip the summer flight to the med! (again)

I do both.. I don't like the med and I don't need to drive something fast.

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

I concur...

If you saw the figures it came up for me you would know it was cr@p.
I have a carbon foot print of 2.5 tons for a family of three.
Lets see Mary beat that with all her fancy panels and stuff.

ARWadworth wrote:
Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carbon...tml/index.aspx

There is a feedback option

A few e-mails might get noticed...

If this bollox is going to be accepted as kosher we could at least try to
get it accurate.



--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

The Medway Handyman wrote:
ARWadworth wrote:
Has anyone else filled in one of these besides me?

I just tried out
http://actonco2.direct.gov.uk/carbon...tml/index.aspx

There is a feedback option

A few e-mails might get noticed...

If this bollox is going to be accepted as kosher we could at least try to
get it accurate.



Only bollox of clean animals can be kosher. :-)

Agreed - it is truly dreadful - I would expect better from a junior
science project.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

ARWadworth wrote:

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.

Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
instead.

However, the dear old Beeb, always keen to support government policies
when they involve raising taxes for spurious reasons like this, showed
a programme on Sunday night(?) that tried to debunk the CO2-debunkers.
It 'answered' the 'sunspot' thing by saying that as sunspot activity
'blew away' the cosmic rays that promote cloud formation (which cools
down the planet), sunspots had nothing to with climate change!

So now we know.....we need to control cosmic rays. New tax, anyone?

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 08:27:44 +0100, Terry Fields wrote:

ARWadworth wrote:

So all in all, Action CO2 calculator is a pile of crap IMHO.

...and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.

Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
instead.

However, the dear old Beeb, always keen to support government policies
when they involve raising taxes for spurious reasons like this, showed
a programme on Sunday night(?) that tried to debunk the CO2-debunkers.
It 'answered' the 'sunspot' thing by saying that as sunspot activity
'blew away' the cosmic rays that promote cloud formation (which cools
down the planet), sunspots had nothing to with climate change!

So now we know.....we need to control cosmic rays. New tax, anyone?

Another astronomical tax?

Don.

The message
from Terry Fields contains these words:

....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.

So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistant?

Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
instead.

If the greenhouse effect is real, and it has been accepted as fact for
over a century, then whether or not CO2 concentrations tend to lag or
lead is an interesting side issue.

There is a rational explanation for the lag, if it really does exist, in
that some of the extra CO2 is expelled from the sea as sea temperatures
rise and the sea is such a huge heat sink that it lags years behind
atmospheric temperature trends.

--
Roger Chapman

Roger wrote:
The message
from Terry Fields contains these words:

....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.

So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistant?

Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
instead.

If the greenhouse effect is real, and it has been accepted as fact for
over a century, then whether or not CO2 concentrations tend to lag or
lead is an interesting side issue.

There is a rational explanation for the lag, if it really does exist, in
that some of the extra CO2 is expelled from the sea as sea temperatures
rise and the sea is such a huge heat sink that it lags years behind
atmospheric temperature trends.

The more frighetning thing is that CO2 appears to be both a cause and an
effect, of global warming: I.e. you have a nice positive feedback system
that can 'flip' the climate between a high CO2/low CO2 regime, depending
on what is stored in the oceans.

Hitherto, its probably been volcanic activity or sunspot driven: now
its fossil fuel driven.

There is an interesting balance also between coal burning and warming,
in that the short term effect of coal burning is to put up particulates
that cool the atmosphe its when you stop burning coal because of acid
rain etc, and fit exhaust catalysers to cars, that you suddenly get a
rise in temperatures. China is now burning more coal than ever..

The poles are the place that receive the least sunlight, but have the
same radiation poetntial..they are the heats sinks of the world.
Reduction in radiation from the poles by CO@ blanketing leads to rapidly
risng polar temperatures.

We are seeing rapidly rising polar temperatures.

Its probably far far too late to stop CO2 generated global warming though.

What is needed is a way to generate the massive amounts of energy we
will need to deal with its effects. An that isnt going to be
photovoltaics or windmills.

Roger wrote:

The message
from Terry Fields contains these words:

....and so is the CO2/'global warming' myth.

So you believe that the greenhouse effect is nonexistant?

Not necessarily; it may be irrelevant, or overstated, or masked by
other mechanisms.

Don't forget the alarmist message that came from the various models
that all predicted a huge rise in 'global warming' due to CO2.

A little scientific investigation revealed that the models had been
'tuned' to give the same answer....exit the modelling as a serious
issue.

Then there was the Met Office, that claimed on national TV that it had
'proved' the link between 'global warming' and CO2. A search of their
website failed to find a published paper that gave that result. The
Met Office has been very quiet on the issue since then...exit the MetO
as a player.

No proponent of 'global warming' has exer explained why the planet
oscillates between cold and warm states; the best they can do is claim
that human activity is 'partly' to blame and 'might' accellerate
'global warming'.

I believe that 17000 scientists work on 'global warming', but the case
for it is made by about a tenth of that number.

Since Al Gore's famous graph of CO2/temperature over the millennia was
shown to be flawed - in that the CO2 levels *lagged* climate change -
the heat has gone out of that debate, and focussed on sunspot activity
instead.

If the greenhouse effect is real, and it has been accepted as fact for
over a century, then whether or not CO2 concentrations tend to lag or
lead is an interesting side issue.

There is a rational explanation for the lag, if it really does exist, in
that some of the extra CO2 is expelled from the sea as sea temperatures
rise and the sea is such a huge heat sink that it lags years behind
atmospheric temperature trends.

Possibly; but if CO2-led 'global warming' is a flaky issue - and I've
touched on some of those above - it might not matter.

I wish I could find the reference that said the planet had cooled by
0.7 degC in the last 12 months - a rise of that magnitude would have
been trumpeted from high buildings by the supporters of CO2-led
'global warming'; instead of the current deafening silence.