It's your call. You can be as extreme as you want - it's just fantasy. It doesn't matter if it is unworkable, let's just toss a few ideas about.

What 'Utopian' ideas do you have to improve the 'eco friendly' state of Britain?



I would like to see packaging taxed at the factory gate. That way consumers can pay for the processing of the rubbish generated by their purchase choices and the price difference between packaged/non-packaged goods would assist in their 'consumer choice'.

Carrier bags should be taxed for this reason, and I'd like to take my wasing liquid bottle to be re-filled instead of binning the old one each time.

I also think that public transport should be returned to the 'nominal-fee' state we had when I first came to south yorkshire. Eg. all fares 20p, to 'help' people to 'choose' their method of transport. Free public transport (locally) for parents with kids (to promote the idea to the young, and discourage people from trying to drive and referee a fight at the same time ;) )

*ducks and waits for cross-fire*

Environmental taxes on 'non-essential' energy consuming devices such as dishwashers, outdoor hot tubs, etc. based on their energy consumption.

A sliding scale on electricity and gas bills that makes you pay more per unit above a 'cap'. To encourage saving energy.

Local authorities to bring in downward pointing lighting - saves energy and cuts light pollution.

Shops encouraged to use 'smart' windows that illuminate only when there are passers by to see the wares. With teh street lighting changes shouldn't cause 'pubic safety' issues.

Easier to sell power in to the grid, easier to get planning permission for things like solar panels, heat panels, etc.

I'll go away and think a bit more now.

Joe :)

Televisions that turn off when nobody is watching them. Similarly, car eangines that turn off after 10 seconds of nobody in them, stop all the cars revving up in cold weather with chokes out, Lights that turn off when noboby is in the room. If people wont carry these, and similar functions out themselves then we must invent equipment that will do it for them.

Nobody else got any madcap ideas then?

There was a good comic strip in the G2 about this today. My fave was the USA plans to build a giant mug of hot chocolate in the atlantic to boost the gulf stream.

Wilf

Originally posted by JoeP
Local authorities to bring in downward pointing lighting - saves energy and cuts light pollution.

What's downward pointing lighting?

Originally posted by JoeP
A sliding scale on electricity and gas bills that makes you pay more per unit above a 'cap'. To encourage saving energy.

Yes!! As opposed to the current situation, where you get charged less per unit the more you use (if I've understood my supplier's somewhat Byzantine pricing policy correctly).

Fine people who refuse to use their blue bin/bags/boxes to recycle.

The things are brought to, and collected from your doorstep and if you are too idle to use them you should pay :thumbsup:

Originally posted by JoeP
Environmental taxes on 'non-essential' energy consuming devices such as dishwashers, outdoor hot tubs, etc. based on their energy consumption.


I think putting the dishwasher on twice a week is more friendly than washing the pots every night, it must use less water, electricity and chemicals.

i have no inclination to get on any bandwagon.
i turn off all tv's,showers etc to save me money , it also helps the environment.

However people should have one child families - massive reduction in fuel use,nappies,toys and packaging, reduced future potential for cars/heating etc.

we should be encouraged/rewarded for recycling,the people recycling don't do it for free why should we.
i have no intention of washing dog food cans,then filling my house with them to put them in a blue box every 2 weeks.

I love the ldea of a tax on packaging. :clap: I usually shop in an organic supermarket where I take my own cloth carrier bag and use paper bags to put fruit and veg in - but on the odd occasion I do visit the supermarket I'm always shocked at the amount of plastic wrapping I end up throwing away.

I also like the idea of a fine on recycling. But the Government should make it compulsory for every council to have recycling schemes in place.

I also think that some of our European neighbours have got the right idea. In Germany, you can take empty bottles back to the supermarket to be recycled, and you get money back for them. It's the same in many bars - take your empty beer bottle back to the bar and get 50 cents off your next beer. They also have lots of windfarms, which I would like to see more of in the UK.

Environmental education should be a subject in school. They teach kids so many useless things these days - instead of giving them a sound understanding of the world we live in and how to protect it.

Finally Strix, you asked for something madcap - so how about passing a law to make everybody vegetarian? Meat production uses up more of the earth's resources than if the same land was used to grow cerials, and the methane farted out by cows is burning a whopping hole in the ozone layer!

PS - Strix, you might be able to refill your washing up liquid. I take my bottle to an Organic supermarket, where they fill it from use 10 litre bottles, which in turn are refilled by the manufacturer!

What about bluetooth in cars and in street lights so that on motorways and other roads at night when it isnt busy the lights only turn on when a car is driving down it.

Originally posted by nick2
I think putting the dishwasher on twice a week is more friendly than washing the pots every night, it must use less water, electricity and chemicals.

Not sure about that. Regarding energy, this site

http://www.cceca.net/energy_usage.html

reckons that a typical dishwasher uses about 2.5 kWh (9000 kJ) per load, just for heating up the water(which is I guess what uses most of the energy).

How much you use when washing by hand depends on how much water you use and how hot you have it. E.g. using 1 gallon and heating it up from 10 to 60 degrees C uses a bit less than 1000 kJ - but I don't know whether those are sensible amounts!

I'd get rid of organic farming and try to improve ordinary farming (with selective breeding or GM) so it's not as bad for us and the environment. More of the crop is wasted with organic farming than conventional farming (thats why it costs more).

Originally posted by nick2
I'd get rid of organic farming and try to improve ordinary farming (with selective breeding or GM) so it's not as bad for us and the environment. More of the crop is wasted with organic farming than conventional farming (thats why it costs more).

This isnt based on any fact, but it was my understanding that most of the tree hugging fraternity were into the whole organic farming thing? Would this be a conflict of interests?

Tax waste.

In certain places in germany, wheeliebins are bar coded, and every bin that is lifted and emptied into the truck is weighed and recorded, and you are charged by the kilogram for the rubbish you create and dispose of.

Water Metering

A tax on carrier bags like the Republic of Ireland.

A Tax on aviation fuel.

Nationalise and subsidise buses and trains.

Originally posted by nick2
I'd get rid of organic farming and try to improve ordinary farming (with selective breeding or GM) so it's not as bad for us and the environment. More of the crop is wasted with organic farming than conventional farming (thats why it costs more).

Sorry Nick2, but I don't think this is a good idea at all.

Pesticides, insecticides, antibiotics and growth hormones will never be good for the environment, or the heath of the consumer.

And there's not as much wasted in Organic farming as you think. More imperfect crops (eg. wonky carrots) are sold than in normal farming because supermarket customers won't buy them, whereas more enivironment-conscious consumers will.

And crops that arn't used are generally turned into animal feed (organic meat is produced from organically fed animals you know), or composted to start the process again.

At the Organic store I visit, the shop keeper often gives me a bag of out of date or unsold greens for my pet rabbit. Waste not, want not!

Organic food costs more because it takes longer to produce (things don't ripen/grow as fast without hormones and chemicals), organic fertiliser and animal feed is more expensive for the farmer, and the food is normally produced an much smaller farms.

And Duffer - I've never hugged a tree in my life! :D ;)

Originally posted by Mo
Fine people who refuse to use their blue bin/bags/boxes to recycle.

The things are brought to, and collected from your doorstep and if you are too idle to use them you should pay :thumbsup:

The London Borough of Barnet have separate collections for different types of rubbish and now have a £1000 fine for people who refuse to comply with the byelaw. Whether it is implemented I dont know but all the people who I know personally in that Borough take it very seriously.

Originally posted by JBee
Pesticides, insecticides, antibiotics and growth hormones will never be good for the environment, or the heath of the consumer.


We need to find ways of not using these things, selective breeding and/or GM could make crops/animals more resistant to pests then the pesticide wouldn't be needed.

Unless your organic crop is grown miles away from any other farm you still get pesticide etc on it which it has picked-up from the ground/air.

Once you save the cost of using any chemicals, processing the crop, packaging etc. you should end-up with a cheaper product, yet organic stuff is more expensive ?

I don't believe that organic crops grow slower, or that organic fertiliser (would that be manure ?) costs more.

Originally posted by nick2
We need to find ways of not using these things, selective breeding and/or GM could make crops/animals more resistant to pests then the pesticide wouldn't be needed.

Unless your organic crop is grown miles away from any other farm you still get pesticide etc on it which it has picked-up from the ground/air.

Once you save the cost of using any chemicals, processing the crop, packaging etc. you should end-up with a cheaper product, yet organic stuff is more expensive ?

I don't believe that organic crops grow slower, or that organic fertiliser (would that be manure ?) costs more.

Well I don't want to eat genetically modified crops :gag:

I do agree that some organic produce will have pesticides on it. There's really no escaping chemicals these days. But organic farmers still need to process their crops, and buy organic fertilisers instead of chemicals. And organic fertilizer is not just simply manure, because the manure (though some is) might not have come from an organic animal.

And why don't you believe that organic things ripen/grow slower? It's common sense - less chemicals = more natural life cycle.

For example, intensively farmed chickens reach adult weight three-times faster than chickens that are not given growth hormones. And organic farmers tend to 'rest' their fields more often than non-organic, because they rely more on soil quality instead of chemicals. This means that their 'production line' halts more often, and for longer.

For more information on why organic is better, visit www.whyorganic.org. The Soil Association website is good too - www.soilassociation.org

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Tax waste.

In certain places in germany, wheeliebins are bar coded, and every bin that is lifted and emptied into the truck is weighed and recorded, and you are charged by the kilogram for the rubbish you create and dispose of.



I love this idea. It would also stop people putting bricks and the like into their bins. :clap:

Originally posted by willman

we should be encouraged/rewarded for recycling,the people recycling don't do it for free why should we.
i have no intention of washing dog food cans,then filling my house with them to put them in a blue box every 2 weeks.

In a way we are rewarded because the less waste the council puts in the landfill sites then the less land fill tax they pay. This means that the extra costs won't be incurred which would in turn be passed onto us in the Council Tax.

Originally posted by JBee
Well I don't want to eat genetically modified crops :gag:

And why don't you believe that organic things ripen/grow slower? It's common sense - less chemicals = more natural life cycle.



Chickens might grow faster, but I grow tomatoes (and other veg) in pots of manure on my back garden and they grow like lightening, not slower, so it's not common sense realy.

Most of the food we eat is already genetically modified, it's just that we have done it over years by selective breeding and cross-pollination. Unless you actually gather wild grass seeds to make bread and eat wild boar sausages you are eating a modified animal/plant.

Originally posted by nick2
Chickens might grow faster, but I grow tomatoes (and other veg) in pots of manure on my back garden and they grow like lightening, not slower, so it's not common sense realy.

Most of the food we eat is already genetically modified, it's just that we have done it over years by selective breeding and cross-pollination. Unless you actually gather wild grass seeds to make bread and eat wild boar sausages you are eating a modified animal/plant.

No offense Nick2, but I think you're just trying to be clever now, and not really making any particular point.

I'm pleased to hear you grown tomatoes, and I'm thrilled they grow fast for you. But if you were an organic tomato farmer you'd probably need to rest your soil every few years, which would slow production long term.

I think it's a bit silly to suggest we all start shooting wildboar and harvesting grass - where would it all end? Meat and potato hotpot with the nextdoor neighbour's cat? :hihi:

But at least eating organic wherever possible helps minimise the damage to your health and the environment.

It was also proven in a recent study that organic fruit and veg contains higher levels of anti-oxidents, which help prevent all types of cancers.

Why not check out the websites I suggested and learn a little more about it? You may even find yourself warming to the idea...

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Tax waste.

In certain places in germany, wheeliebins are bar coded, and every bin that is lifted and emptied into the truck is weighed and recorded, and you are charged by the kilogram for the rubbish you create and dispose of.



There are obvious problems with that, but aren't we already taxed for the disposal of our rubbish ? Out here in rural Shefield there is plenty of evidence that some people are determined to avoid the charges now imposed at landfill sites, the culprits are probably 'cowboy' builders but it seems impossible for the council to prevent the dumping or catch the offenders.

I'd like to see a lot more investment in 'green' power generatiom, - tidal and wave-power generators. More pumped storage schemes like the one at Dinorwic, and the there seems to be still plenty of scope for new hydro-electric schemes.

Public transport should definitley be taken back into some kind of not-for-profit 'public' ownership. Long distance trains should be operated on the same model as commercial aircraft, - bookable seats only, with last minute passengers allowed to buy tickets only for unbooked seats on specific journeys.

Originally posted by Greybeard
Public transport should definitley be taken back into some kind of not-for-profit 'public' ownership. Long distance trains should be operated on the same model as commercial aircraft, - bookable seats only, with last minute passengers allowed to buy tickets only for unbooked seats on specific journeys.

Why bookable seats only Greybeard? I'm not criticising, I just want to know your reasons behind this suggestion...

Originally posted by JBee
No offense Nick2, but I think you're just trying to be clever now, and not really making any particular point.


Not realy.

You said organic crops GROW SLOWER, I don't think they do.

You said you don't want to eat GM crops, I say you already do, if you can explain how we got the crops we eat now without modifying them I would be very interested to hear it.

I'm not trying to be clever, I'm just questioning your "facts"

Originally posted by nick2
Not realy.

You said organic crops GROW SLOWER, I don't think they do.

You said you don't want to eat GM crops, I say you already do, if you can explain how we got the crops we eat now without modifying them I would be very interested to hear it.

I'm not trying to be clever, I'm just questioning your "facts"

****Sighs****

Lets talk about facts then...

I never said organic crops GROW SLOWER. What I actually wrote was: "Organic food costs more because it takes longer to produce (things don't ripen/grow as fast without hormones and chemicals)..."

Note the use of the words 'organic food' and 'things'. I was trying to make the point that organic farming is a much slower process. Animals mature slower without growth hormones, and fields must be rested between harvests.

I have already expressed my delight for you at your fast growing tomotoes, but I really don't think you can base your entire knowledge of organic farming on them. Not until you've had your soil tested, manure soil association approved ect. and even then, I think you'd need a larger case study than your backgarden/allotment.

And with reference to GM foods - I'm well aware of the process of evolution and selective breeding that has gone into creating many of today's crops. But I'm not in favour of the current modifications proposed by scientists, and try to avoid eating food containing what we now class as GM ingrediants. We have too little information about what they could do to our bodies, and I don't want to be part of the experiment.

I'm not quite sure how we managed to get onto this topic anyway, since my first post was on recycling, packaging tax and washing up liquid. You seem to have jumped on the fact that I mentioned that I visit an organic supermarket.

But now you come to mention it - yes I do think organic food is better for the environment. And personally I try to reduce to ammount of toxins I knowingly put into my body to maximise my chances of a long and healthy life.

What's wrong with that?

Originally posted by JBee
You seem to have jumped on the fact that I mentioned that I visit an organic supermarket.


I never noticed the bit about where you shop, it was your excuses (becasue thats what they are) as to why orgainc food is more expensive that interested me.

Originally posted by JBee
I usually shop in an organic supermarket.

PS - Strix, you might be able to refill your washing up liquid. I take my bottle to an Organic supermarket, where they fill it from use 10 litre bottles, which in turn are refilled by the manufacturer!
Is there an oganic supermarket in or near Sheffield?I want to take my washing up liquid to be refilled!

Enforced vegetarianism 4 or 5 nights of the week - save a fortune on production and farming costs.

Every family made to grow their own produce, say take up 5% of their garden/yard to do so.

Any produce that can be produced locally to do so - no unneccessary shipping costs to make things cheaper.

Ban ALL 4x4's.

Review of packaging - only neccessary amounts to be used. Unbelievable stupidity with triple packaging currently.

Public transport services increased in frequency and coverage - individual review of all persons to be done so that only those who have no other way to get around can use cars regularly.

Car-pooling for other times.

Originally posted by noseyrosie
Enforced vegetarianism 4 or 5 nights of the week - save a fortune on production and farming costs.


How ?

Surely more vegetables would need to be grown on farms ?

Originally posted by nick2
I never noticed the bit about where you shop, it was your excuses (becasue thats what they are) as to why orgainc food is more expensive that interested me.

Excuses?

Carlo Leifert, Britian's first chair in Ecological Agriculture, writes:

"Organic foods are currently more expensive for a number of reasons.
Firstly, the yields are on average between 10 and 20% lower than in conventional agriculture and, with some crops (potatoes, for example), it may be as much as 40% lower.
Also, production costs are higher in organic farming. For example, organic farmers don't use herbicides so they have to weed some crops, such as onions and carrots, by hand. Such a labour intensive method contributes to a more expensive product.
This explains why organic foods are currently more expensive, and also why the differences in price are more for some foods (e.g., potatoes) than for others (e.g., mushrooms). However, this explanation is very simplistic, as it doesn't take into account the hidden costs associated with food production.
Agricultural practices that make use of pesticides and fertilisers can be expensive because of the harmful effect they have on human health and the environment. The price we pay for our food does not take into account the cost of solving these problems - we pay for those indirectly through tax, which the government then uses to try and limit the damage inflicted by agriculture.
Some scientists have estimated that the use of just one agrochemical (methyl-bromide) contributes to more than 20% of the global ozone depletion. This in turn is estimated to double the incidence of skin cancer globally.
Our taxes are then used to pay for operations and the care of terminally ill patients. This money is currently not added to the cost of producing crops (such as strawberries) using methyl-bromide. If the environmental cost were accounted for, organic strawberries would be cheaper than conventional ones.
The cost of reducing nitrate levels in drinking water amounts to many millions of pounds. Organic farming systems were repeatedly shown to produce significantly lower nitrate pollution than conventional farming, thus reducing the water companies' costs. However, we pay for water treatment through our taxes, rather than charging farms proportionately to the amount of pollution they create. If we did, organic food would become cheaper than conventional foods.
There are many more examples, all of which amount to the same conclusion:
We are currently subsidising conventional farming by not charging farmers for the negative effects of their production methods. This creates an artificially low price for conventional foods and an artificially high price premium for organic foods.
Thankfully, there is some hope on the horizon. EU and UK politicians are increasingly acknowledging this imbalance and are discussing proposals to correct it. This will involve either introducing 'pesticide taxes' for farming methods that damage the environment or rewarding organic farmers for environmentally friendly practices. If this becomes reality, the net effect for the consumer will be that the price differential between organic and conventional food will be reduced."

Yasmin Spevack, editor of an Green Food, writes:

"Organic food is generally more expensive than intensively-farmed food.
Organic food is better for you and your family. It contains more vitamins, minerals, enzymes and taste than intensively-farmed produce. It is also free from insecticides, pesticides, growth hormones, antibiotics, fertilisers and a whole host of other toxic artificial additives, flavourings, colourings and preservatives. So if it contains less added chemicals, why does it cost more?
At first glance, you might expect organic food to cost less to produce than foods with added extras. However, it's a lot more complex than that. The main reason that intensively farmed foods are cheaper to buy in the shops is that you are paying for them in your taxes. Agro-chemical agriculture is heavily subsidised by the taxpayer through the government, whereas organic farming receives no subsidies at all. This ludicrous situation dates back to the aftermath of World War II. The governments of the day needed to ensure that the severe food shortages of the war never happened again. Starvation and famine in Europe urgently needed to be protected against, and the new chemical technologies of the 1950's seemed like a gift. One of the first things that the united European governments did was to encourage an abundance of foods by subsidising the use of chemicals in farming.
The thinking behind subsidies was optimistic and heartfelt, but became increasingly outdated and defunct as time marched on. The huge rotting surpluses of food since the 1970's has confirmed that production from intensive farming is not working. The butter mountains, wine lakes, wasted fresh produce and uneaten meat products of the last thirty years are a testament to outmoded laws and inability to change. Europe has been in a legal deadlock for decades, stifled by the mammoth amount of paperwork needed to fix the current unworkable situation. And now that more and more people want to go organic, the need to modify the way that subsidies are distributed has never been more urgent.
Another crucial reason why organic food is more expensive to buy than intensively-farmed food is that agro-chemicals are designed to make food cheaper to produce. Agro-chemicals were not developed with nutrition, taste or the ecology in mind. The chemical designers' remit was to make mass production of food cheaper. End of story. So what we get is a cheap but inferior product. Given the choice of buying an organic apple or an intensively produced apple, and I know which one I'd prefer any day. I may have to pay up to 5p more for the organic apple, but it will be juicier, have a more appetising texture and aroma, and will generally be more tasty. It will be packed with up to 60% more vitamins, minerals, enzymes and trace nutrients, and be free from a cocktail of up to 40 different chemicals, waxes and insecticides. It will be an interesting variety, produced by a farmer committed to fine food, and it will have left the tree in a meadow with healthy soil and filled with a diversity of butterflies, lady birds, birds and countryside wildlife. So my extra 5p will have been well spent, 'cos me and my home planet are worth it!
Michael van Straten is a leading organic broadcaster and writer, as well as one of Organic magazine's resident experts. He agrees that we need to think hard before choosing an intensively produced product over an organic product simply because of cost.
If you look at crops like coffee, cotton and tobacco, these are the most heavily sprayed and toxically damaged crops in the world. Yet those toxins don't directly bother us as consumers, because we don't get them. It's the actual workers in the fields that suffer. It's a nightmare, it's just morally reprehensible that we should allow that to go on. Let's take the situation in Zimbabwe. 10% of the population of Zimbabwe own 90% of the land, and it's mostly tobacco farms. They couldn't care less about the living conditions of their workers. They've had all sorts of genetic problems, fertility and conception problems, skin problems, high cancer incidences. Don't you think that it's worth paying a little bit more for organic produce?
So that's the facts to date. Like it or lump it, organic food costs a bit more, and it's definitely worth the extra. But this is where the story gets more complex. Because there are experts that say that organic food is actually cheaper to produce than intensively farmed foods. Sounds crazy? Well read on...
Professor Jules Pretty is professor for Environment and Society at Essex University. He has been looking at the hidden costs of intensive farming for many years.
The consumer pays three times when they buy intensively farmed food. Firstly, they pay at the shop till. Next, they pay for the same food through their taxes, as modern farming is subsidised through the tax system. Thirdly, the consumer pays again to clean up the damage to the environment caused during the growing and the raising of the food.
Farming subsidies cost the UK taxpayer about £3 billion pounds every year. We then spend an estimated £2.3 billion every year cleaning up the ecosystem. The expenses for the aftermath of agro-chemicals are far reaching. The government spends £120 million of taxpayers' money every year just to clean up pesticide residues from farming which pollute our water. These are effectively hidden subsidies from water consumers to polluters.
"The UK pesticide market is currently worth about £500 million every year. It is extraordinary that the cost of removing pesticides from drinking water amounts to a quarter of the market value — some £120 million annually," says Professor Pretty.
Then there are the hidden costs to the nation, such as the BSE crisis. There were no cases in the UK of BSE in any organic farms. Although the current foot and mouth crisis can effect any kind of farm due to its wind-born nature, BSE was exclusively a problem only in intensive farms. The cost to the NHS for treating agro-chemical related problems is also fiendishly difficult to calculate. However, exponentially rising cases of asthma, cancers, heart disease and dietary disorders almost certainly have a link to poor diet, increased pollution and intensive farming techniques. Then there are the costs to wildlife, whose natural habitats are destroyed by intensive agriculture.
Craig Sams is the founder of Whole Earth Foods and co-founder of Green and Black's chocolate. An organic campaigner of many years, Craig has recently been translating Professor Pretty's findings into market place terms.
Subsidies work out at about 40 pence in every pound spent on food, giving an extra cost of 86 pence on every pound charged on your supermarket bill. This cost of food is paid through the taxation system. Organic farmers earn lower subsidies because they grow rotation crops that don't maximise subsidy income. They cost society about 25 pence in every pound. Their externalised costs are a fraction of the 46 pence that Professor Pretty's team calculate. You could even say that they are net contributors to the asset side of the national balance sheet by improving the land. When you cost in the real cost of industrial agriculture and take away the subsidies that favour the wrong use of resources, you end up with a situation where, if it were in the real world, organic food would actually cost less than conventional.
Instead of spending £5.3 billion every year to artificially prop up the current intensive agro-chemical system, we could be moving towards a modern alternative which produces better food at a lesser cost. The Soil Association has calculated that if we spend £1.2 billion every year for the next five years, we can convert all of the agro-chemical farms in the UK to organic farming methods. This represents a huge financial saving of over £20 billion pounds which could be made to British taxpayers over the next five years. It also means that the UK could theoretically grow a surplus of organic produce, exporting it to countries where demand outstrips supply of organics, just like the current situation here in the UK.
The general public is voting with their cash. More and more people are going organic, with 20% of all UK shoppers buying at least one organic product every week, mostly at their local supermarket. Prices for organic food have been falling dramatically over the last five years as more and more organic food is sold. All of the major supermarkets are competing for your organic custom, with own-brand organic products sitting on the shelf alongside established organic brands. Helen Browning is the owner of Eastbrook Farm, the UK's leading organic meat farm. Helen warns that we should be on guard about asking for prices which are unreasonably low for the organic farming community.
We are in great danger of seeing the Walmart effect in action on Britain's organic foods. I really am very worried indeed that we are going to see supermarkets fighting to reduce the price of organic food. That would make it even less profitable for organic farmers to remain in business. The Walmart effect has already made an impact on the UK organic food industry. It already means that supermarkets are importing organic products even when domestic products are available, and that's likely to happen more and more. We're trying to sell organic pork products from Eastbrook Farm to multiple retailers. It's very difficult to compete on price with other countries like Denmark. Danish farmers are being subsidised to a much higher level than we are, and organic standards vary in different member states of the EU. We're very much in danger of pushing our own organic farmers out of business in a few years time, and trampling the organic sector at this early stage. If we manage to achieve policy changes to the UK's subsidy system, then these things won't be quite such a big issue.
Laura Ampomah is the head of organic food at Sainsbury's consumer PR department. She agrees with Helen that it is vital that we safeguard the future of organic farming by paying a little bit extra for organic food.
Sainsbury's believes that is has an ethical responsibility to sell organic foods for their true costs. We recognise the real cost of organic production which is generally smaller scale and more labour intensive, sometimes with smaller crop yields. Farmers also have to convert their land to organic production over a period of time, and as organic farming relies on crop rotation, up to 25% of land may be left to lie fallow at any one time to increase natural soil fertility. Sainsbury's stance is to be responsible and to avoid both profiteering or artificially subsidising the market. Instead of lowering prices which could threaten the livelihood of the farmers, Sainsbury's is helping farmers to convert to organic production.
It is Sainsbury's policy to reflect in the price to the customer, the extra costs involved in organic farming and production. Sainsbury's does not make additional margins on organic foods — the 'premium' charged to the customer is in turn passed back through Sainsbury's suppliers to the farmer. We do not believe it is beneficial to the long term development of organic foods to artificially lower the price or hide the true costs to our customers. Instead we are actively encouraging organic farming in Britain. As the organic market grows we believe prices will stabilise, but it would not be realistic to speculate on timings for this.
So, expect to continue paying a bit more for your organic food for some time to come. But let's all live in hope that the powers that be listen up to Professor Pretty and the Soil Association so that we can all afford as much organic food as we want.

None of that explains where all the extra land will come from once we move from intensive farming or how we will make up the for the reduced production (up to 40% less !)

Organic farming will never be viable unless you a) get people to eat less or b) reduce the size of the population.

It's a nice treat for people who can afford it, like fizzy spring water, but thats all it is.

Originally posted by nick2
How ?

Surely more vegetables would need to be grown on farms ?

Silly-billy....

Think about it.

The amount of land taken for animal farming is far larger than for arable:

Food needs to be grown for the animals to eat.
THe animals also have to live somewhere

However...

Plants grow in one field.
THe amount of people that can be fed from a field full of crops compared to the amount that can be fed from the same area with grazing stock is far, far, larger.

Ban smoking in all public places.

Originally posted by nick2
None of that explains where all the extra land will come from once we move from intensive farming or how we will make up the for the reduced production (up to 40% less !)

Organic farming will never be viable unless you a) get people to eat less or b) reduce the size of the population.

It's a nice treat for people who can afford it, like fizzy spring water, but thats all it is.

Nick2 - I'm not going to spend the rest of my afternoon cutting and pasting from various farming/Government websites to answer all your questions. But if you look on the two websites I suggested, you'll definitely get your answer to that particular query. I suggest you do your research before quizing people.

Also, NoseyRosie is absolutely right about vegetarianism being one answer to world hunger. You can feed two people on an area the size of a football field if you use it to graze cattle, but you can feed nearly 70 if you use it to grow wheat.

Figuring out how to persuade the Government to share the wheat with the rest of the world would be a different matter though!

Originally posted by noseyrosie

Ban ALL 4x4's.





s**t thats the tractors & combine harvesters all gone.
why not ban all cars instead the ones u don't like.
best get out the pony & cart.

stop women going to work, then they can grow all the food in the garden.wash the pots by hand,wash the clothes in the sink & boil tallow to make candles, wot a saving.
it would also cut down on wasteful spending on clothes,production of alcoholic beverages for the ladettes,
spot on result.

don't wanna be veggie so i'll " grow" my own rabbits & guinea pigs n stuff.self sufficiency the radical way forward.

pity it didn't work before.

Get everyone to vote for the Green Party. That would soon have the policymakers changing their tunes.
You did say utopian.
The majority of replies here seem sensible, but now we have to start telling everyone we know to the point of their distraction. Even if it means annoying people. There is no time.

Originally posted by JBee
I suggest you do your research before quizing people.


I couldn't be bothered, I though you would have all the answers. I didn't realise you were just copying from another website.

Do you never question anything without first doing research ?

Originally posted by nick2
I couldn't be bothered, I though you would have all the answers. I didn't realise you were just copying from another website.

Do you never question anything without first doing research ?

:hihi: Oh well, at least you're honest Nick2. I am quite well up on organic farming, cause as I've said I buy organic produce myself, and I have my reasons for buying it, so most of the STATS are my own! But when you started questioning everything I was writing I thought I'd better refer to a few expert sources as backup! No point in getting on my high horse and then discovering I was talking out of my ar*e!

So it looks like we've both learnt something today. You've learnt a little about organic farming (I hope), and I've learnt even more about organic farming!

:clap:

Originally posted by JBee
:hihi: Oh well, at least you're honest Nick2. I am quite well up on organic farming, cause as I've said I buy organic produce myself, and I have my reasons for buying it, so most of the STATS are my own! But when you started questioning everything I was writing I thought I'd better refer to a few expert sources as backup! No point in getting on my high horse and then discovering I was talking out of my ar*e!

So it looks like we've both learnt something today. You've learnt a little about organic farming (I hope), and I've learnt even more about organic farming!

:clap:

Originally posted by JBee


Sorry, I have no idea how I keep copying my own posts! Am evidently not so well up on computers!!!

This is total fantasy land, but have all bus transport entirely free of charge, with a guaranteed one bus every 30 minutes on every route between 6am and 11pm, and no house in an urban or suburban area to be more than 10 mins walk from a route. Sigh, dream on...

More realistically, scrap the two-tier car tax system and have a sliding scale instead, beginning at say £100 per annum for 1000cc, rising £10 or £20 for every other cc you add. Or have the 'miles travelled' system instead.

Just a comment, but isn't it amazing now that if you drive an electric or LPG vehicle into town any day of the week, you can park all day for 1p.

would love to see government incentitives/tax breaks for recycling and using "green" energy sources. better public transport (cheaper, frequent and reliable) and more cycle lane / paths to help with real transport needs.
someone to invent windows are also solar panels, for the same price as normal windows. Additional to this, ANY green alternative to a current environmental polluting product should be made availble at competative prices.
for renewable energy to be considered a major energy source and not just some thing that hippies think would be really cool to do.
to grow more of my own produce so that i don't have to buy it from shops.
i could personally do soo much more but for one reason or the other don't.... note to self DO MORE! :)

Supermarkets are taxed on their plastic waste and one of our loacal companies has invented a product to cut down on this: the loadhog lid eliminates the need for disposable plastic film and strapping see www.loadhoglids.com

A great idea!

Are there many in use then Debk?

Which supermarket(s) use them?

It's still a relitavely new product with a lot of companies trialing the lids( like Tesco, Royal Mail, Asda, Honda & smaller food production companies). If some of the trials result in the lids being used it will be great for the environment & ceate around 70 extra jobs at the Sheffield factory. :D

Can you start them a thread of their own?
You'd be surprised who reads this forum ;)

I'd make everyone read 'State of Fear' by Michael Crichton

It's a pretty good book and changed my opinions on the environment fairly heavily!

Wilf

:huh: how did I miss this one?


Every smoker caught dropping a fag end or packet etc to face a standard £50 on the spot fine, monies to go to planting native trees & rearing rare native species of fauna & flora.

:clap:

Originally posted by Don_Kiddick
:huh: how did I miss this one?


Every smoker caught dropping a fag end or packet etc to face a standard £50 on the spot fine, monies to go to planting native trees & rearing rare native species of fauna & flora.

:clap:

Same fine for everyone dropping a McDonalds wrapper/ tin can/ sweet wrapper/ crisp bag, which seem to accumulate into much bigger piles than tab-ends do.

But that's already in place :confused:

Fag buts are litter, and so are McDonalds packaging :P

This one should go over well..... :rolleyes:

BAN HOT TEA!

Imagine all the cooking gas that would be saved over the course of only one year.

Originally posted by Chicago
This one should go over well..... :rolleyes:

BAN HOT TEA!

Imagine all the cooking gas that would be saved over the course of only one year.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO........... ..................................... Damned Americans with their 'iced tea' :loopy:

I have an idea!

Every new house built must be fitted with a small wind turbine and solar panels.

That way we can have our cup of tea and drink it!

Originally posted by Deavon
I have an idea!

Every new house built must be fitted with a small wind turbine and solar panels.

That way we can have our cup of tea and drink it!

A friend of a friend of mine asked the council if they could have a small (realy small) wind turbine on their roof and the council said no, because it was an eyesore.

Sooooooo..... Nobody in Sheffield has satellite telly then? :suspect:

Originally posted by Strix
Sooooooo..... Nobody in Sheffield has satellite telly then? :suspect:

Well, exactly.

The turbine would have generated enough electricity to provide all her hot water too (on windy days, which is most of Winter)

Someone needs to start asking questions at the monthly open Sheffield First meetings as, with one piece in the Telegraph especially, they keep mentioning how green our city is and that we ought to build on this notion.
I am surprised that permission was refused, as these roof-top turbines were, I thought, designed for the job and for mass usage.
Great value also at just over a grand, with a grant for money off too!
Clears Skies also give money to community's hoping to set up green initiatives. It could be that your friend would find more success if she were to go to planning with people and not alone.
In these days of regeneration we should not miss the opportunity to tell as many people as possible about how easy it really is to build or convert buildings into zero-emission homes.
Take a look at what " Zedfactory " are doing. - Sorry don't know how to make links-stuck in Middle-Ages (the time, not my age).

Apparently you can phone the national grid and ask for all your home's power to come from wind turbine sources!

I'm in the process of researching phone numbers...

Originally posted by Mo
Fine people who refuse to use their blue bin/bags/boxes to recycle.



how about we fine councils who refuse to provide such facilities?

Originally posted by JBee
****Sighs****

Lets talk about facts then...

I never said organic crops GROW SLOWER. What I actually wrote was: "Organic food costs more because it takes longer to produce (things don't ripen/grow as fast without hormones and chemicals)..."

Note the use of the words 'organic food' and 'things'. I was trying to make the point that organic farming is a much slower process. Animals mature slower without growth hormones, and fields must be rested between harvests.

I have already expressed my delight for you at your fast growing tomotoes, but I really don't think you can base your entire knowledge of organic farming on them. Not until you've had your soil tested, manure soil association approved ect. and even then, I think you'd need a larger case study than your backgarden/allotment.

And with reference to GM foods - I'm well aware of the process of evolution and selective breeding that has gone into creating many of today's crops. But I'm not in favour of the current modifications proposed by scientists, and try to avoid eating food containing what we now class as GM ingrediants. We have too little information about what they could do to our bodies, and I don't want to be part of the experiment.

With selective breeding type things we dont know how the animals/plants will change.

With GM you know exactly what you change and can study the effect in a controlled environment. So GM seems a lot safer than the old way of just hoping it all turns out ok. Or am I missing some facts that means this isnt the case?

Originally posted by noseyrosie
Apparently you can phone the national grid and ask for all your home's power to come from wind turbine sources!

I'm in the process of researching phone numbers...

Please pm me or post the number when you find it.... I would be really interested in this. Will also have a look into it and let you guys know if i find anything.

single car occupancy in major metropolotan centres to be made illegal.

They do this in Amsterdam.

it will force people to car share and make the congestion in our city centres diminish. there will be less pollution and a nicer environment which would in turn encourage people to walk, cycle or use public transport.

Originally posted by noseyrosie
Apparently you can phone the national grid and ask for all your home's power to come from wind turbine sources!

I'm in the process of researching phone numbers...
1. they can't segregate it
2. they charge you more for the privelege!!!

If you have a wind turbine or solar panel that feeds back into the grid when you're not consuming your own power, they buy it off you at a cheaper price than they charge you for their power :suspect:

You could move to Scotland, and enjoy being fed by their Hydro-Electric power by default :D

Originally posted by tamarindl
Please pm me or post the number when you find it.... I would be really interested in this. Will also have a look into it and let you guys know if i find anything.


found this, haven't had a chance to look at it properly as I'm meant to be working....
http://www.npower.com/At_home/Juice-clean_and_green/About_Juice.html

Originally posted by tamarindl
found this, haven't had a chance to look at it properly as I'm meant to be working....
http://www.npower.com/At_home/Juice-clean_and_green/About_Juice.html

T'only trouble with npower of course is that they own lots and lots of nasty power stations. They are trying to use their muscle to buy back customers. Good Energy will also price match for you and you will know your hard -earned cash will not be going into multi-national coffers.
Mind you they do bank with Barclays! But when asked they said that Co-op couldn't offer the type of banking they needed.
Good Energy's ethi-score from Ethical Consumer is top rated, unlike npower, which is not good.

Originally posted by nightrider
With selective breeding type things we dont know how the animals/plants will change.

With GM you know exactly what you change and can study the effect in a controlled environment. So GM seems a lot safer than the old way of just hoping it all turns out ok. Or am I missing some facts that means this isnt the case?

I was looking at a picture the other day, of a fully ripe, yet unopened cotton bud. It seems the GM strain failed to make the bud open. The growers were up in arms. Scary, isn't it!

I would like to see bandwaggons converted to run on hydrogen fuel cells.

I would also like to see more people cycling and recycling.

Taxing waste is a great idea.

Marks and spencers md's hanged for there disgraceful overuse of packaging (along with various other companies)

Higher tax for higher polluting cars.

Trolley buses

More renewable energy use - tho I'm not sure plonking wind farms everywhere is teh answer

All new houses with solar panels on the roof

Reduce allowable car usage - force people onto public transport.

Enfore insulation of new build housing by law

Build more high speed railways - reduce need for flying

Aviation fuel tax

Tax meat more? That could be an interesting one.

Tax relief and help with capital costs of putting solar panels on ones roof.

Stop people buying new mobile phones/TV's/computers etc and throwing the old in the bin somehow. The amount of electrical goods that are thrown away each week is frightening.

Packaging; goooooooooooood. Give me more senseless packaging and consumables I don't need.

Stuff is fun.

ALL supermarkets should charge for carrier bags. Netto does and thereforw I reuse mine all the time.