Efficiency elide

Debates on UK energy policy focus almost exclusively on energy generation/production and often neglect even to mention energy saving and energy efficiency. It’s always going to be cheaper to save energy and be efficient than it is to generate it - not only does it cut household bills and increase the profitability of businesses by reducing their outgoings, it also cuts pollution rapidly, is a very good job creator, can increase comfort, cut noise levels, and can sometimes be done using materials normally thrown away...So whilst we are so wasteful of energy why consider building large numbers of new power stations of any kind? Why is our primary focus not on creating a lower energy, energy thrifty culture? Basic, already existing technologies can be used but the challenge is to combine these with thrifty attitudes and behaviours.

The energy generation debate at present often zooms in on nuclear and wind. Nuclear power is low carbon emission in operation but we’ve had it since the 1950s and it has done nothing to stop climate change. The UK currently has nuclear 16 reactors in operation at 9 different sites - and it’s had more in the past. We've come to rely on fossil fuels and population has increased as has our level and intensity of consumption but expanding nuclear power for decades - and expanding power generation by all methods - has been part of unsustainable plans for industrial and economic expansion. This attitude still prevails. Until we change from unsustainable economic expansion to properly and fully applying sustainable development - including an energy policy with energy saving and efficiency as its primary focus - then we won’t tackle economic, social and environmental problems such as climate change.

The scale at which we waste energy is vast, so the scope for energy saving is huge. For example the Energy Saving Trust said that UK households waste £1.3 billion by just leaving TVs and other electronic devices switched on... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-bills/9355870/Energy-Saving-Trust-households-waste-1.3bn-for-leaving-gadget-switched-on.html#  . In hard economic times and with energy prices rising you'd think people would be more careful with their consumption but apparently they aren't, so we’ve made little progress towards a energy thrifty culture. Research in 2006 found the UK was top of the European energy waster league. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6075794.stm

Part of the problems is the fact that my local paper can’t even write a balanced and correct piece about nuclear power, let alone cover energy issues in the round as it should do. People are often ill-informed as a result.  Here's my case against nuclear power: http://tinyurl.com/c75rvbg .Here's  a  post arguing for energy efficiency, combined heat and power and decentralised energy: http://tinyurl.com/cxagb4o.  Some thoughts on local renewable energy developments here: http://tinyurl.com/bm5m764.

Super Science

Check out this program on the BBC. In the 2012 Richard Dimbleby Lecture, leading geneticist and Nobel laureate Sir Paul Nurse explores the wonder of science and how it enhances our culture and civilisation.

He investigates how science can not only help solve the world's big problems, but also be harnessed to improve health and quality of life.

One of Britain's most eminent scientists, Sir Paul is the president of the Royal Society and chief executive of the UK Centre for Medical Research and Innovation.

Time to kick sexism out of football | Beatrix Campbell | Comment is free | The Guardian

Excellent piece about sexism, racism, football, Rooney, Ferguson...

Time to kick sexism out of football Beatrix Campbell Comment is free The Guardian

Football has dealt with racism on the terraces, but still ignores sexism among the players

The News of the World devoted its first five pages today to yet another sleazy story about a footballer's private life (sordid allegations about Wayne Rooney this time). But for all the sound and fury, footballers' misogyny is apparently sanctioned. When footballers sexually exploit women, go to lap dancing clubs, buy sex or "harvest" local girls to line them up for shagging parties, it still doesn't count, somehow, as sexism. It attracts only a fatalistic sigh; a notion that there's nothing you can do about young men with more money than sense – often shadowed by a kind of class contempt that these working-class heroes can't cope with the ludicrous wealth that people who are born to rule somehow manage instinctively.

The campaign against racism – once routine, embedded and sanctioned in football – has been a triumph. What was once regarded as ungovernable and inevitable in popular culture has been transformed – football's governing bodies have been forced to confront it. Now, clubs, players and fans all know what racism is, what it does and why it won't be tolerated. Everyone has been enlightened, and football culture has been redeemed. Why then does sexism – an equivalently embedded culture of contempt – attract so little interest, so little comprehension? Why does anti-sexism carry no commitment or confidence in football?

Footballers' ridiculous and indefensible earnings apparently generate a sense of masculine entitlement. And there's nothing in the club culture that challenges that: managers don't engage with players about what sexism is, or why it is unacceptable, nor do they take responsibility for helping these young men "not to be sexist and not to behave like a pillock", as one Man U fan put it.

Clubs do not, it seems, include sexism, sexual exploitation and sexual betrayal in the portfolio of their duty to care. They certainly don't see it as part of their duty of care to the game itself. It is as if blokes cannot be blamed for blokey bad behaviour.

But racism was once an ingredient of popular culture, too: racism and sexism were the vernacular of sport talk. Now racism has lost its legitimacy. Fans explain that booing the black players in the other team lost its logic when black players acquired critical mass, when all the great teams hired black players. Mark Perryman, the convener of the London England Fans supporters' group, reckons that the anti-racism is fragile, but agrees that it became nonsensical with the rise of black players.

Perryman does see some cultural shuffles around sexism, however. Ashley Cole lost his allure not because of his performance as a player but because of his performance as a man, he says: "Cole was very rich, very bling, but he became one of the most unpopular players in England because of his treatment of Cheryl Cole."

Sexism may not yet be recognised for what it is, but something about masculine attitudes to morality is shifting on the terraces. Men taking their kids to the game don't want them to hear the c-word any more than they want to hear the n-word.

But if there is a critique of sordid, cheating, whoring sexism, then it isn't coming from the places with the institutional power to do something about it: club management.

When Sir Alex Ferguson was asked at a press conference to comment on the scandal involving an estimated 30 Manchester United players whose Christmas 2007 bash resulted in allegations of rape and "roasting", he said he had nothing to say about it, except that he'd been "dealing with situations like this for 21 years. I know exactly what to do." He fined the players – who included Rooney – and ruled that the next Christmas knees-up would be a family affair. The club announced: "He doesn't expect them to be virtual saints but he puts a lot of store in them involving partners, and knows it will keep them all on the straight and narrow."

The fact is, Ferguson doesn't know what to do. He refuses to know: "I will not be guided or instructed by anyone," he said after the Christmas bash. And so he continues to rely on the Wags to sort out a cultural crisis that he won't confront.