I know I said I had gone for Xmas, but a quick comment on the supplement to PPS1:
para. 20:
In particular, planning authorities should:
– not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate either the overall need for renewable energy and its distribution, nor question the energy justification for why a proposal for such development must be sited in a particular location;
– ensure any local approach to protecting landscape and townscape is consistent with PPS22 and does not preclude the supply of any type of renewable energy other than in the most exceptional circumstances;
– alongside any criteria-based policy developed in line with PPS22, consider identifying suitable areas for renewable and low-carbon energy sources, and supporting infrastructure, where this would help secure the development of such sources, but in doing so take care to avoid stifling innovation including by rejecting proposals solely because they are outside areas identified for energy generation; and
- expect a proportion of the energy supply of new development to be secured from decentralised and renewable or low-carbon energy sources.
Now read that again with the mindset that regulation exists to form boundaries. Is it just me, or is this giving permission to innovate (which surely does not need to be given). An awkward way of saying things, in my opinion – being specifically told what we don’t have to prove…
mel starrs Opinion Climate Change, energy development, energy generation, energy justification, energy supply, low-carbon energy sources, PPS, renewable energy
A bit early to be calling it a day for Xmas, but I am currently up to my eyeballs in learning Spanish – I have homework to do and everything!
Normal service will resume in the New Year; expect blogging to begin again on Monday 7th January. I am endeavouring to clear out all my drafts with another “post a day” exercise for January and possibly February (found some more items lurking in my Gmail, Google Reader and del.icio.us inboxes). Next year I might even make it back to blogging “real time”.
Feliz Navidad!
mel starrs Uncategorized Christmas, Google, Housekeeping, Merry Xmas, New Year\'s Day
After the serious note yesterday – some silliness. Rob Annable over at no2self has some coffee-snortling funny lyrics to the tune of I will survive:
Were you the one who tried to break me with your RFIs
you think I’d crumble you think I’d lay down and die?
mel starrs Diversions Rob Annable
Recently found this article in Vanity Fair of all places. The article exposes some of the alleged shocking over-expenditure by KBR in Iraq. KBR, (#15 in ENR’s 2006 Top 150 Global Design Firms) formerly Kellogg, Brown and Root, have recently been shed by Halliburton.
There are so many things to be said here, but the point I most want to make, is do you know who you work for? Are you happy with the choices they make and the contracts they are involved in? I’m in the lucky position at the minute of having the time to assess who I work for next and what values I want to share with any future employer. On the basis of this article (and other information), I won’t be approaching KBR. Sustainability, at it’s most basic level, carries a responsibility to use resources (be they time, money or people) wisely. This kind of behaviour is anything but sustainable:
KBR’s current military-support contract is known as the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program, or logcap. This is the contract’s third incarnation, and, like its predecessors, logcap 3 is a “cost-plus” contract: whatever KBR spends, the government agrees to reimburse, with the addition of a fee of about 3 percent. The more the company spends, the more it makes, so it pays to be profligate. All the former employees I spoke to told of KBR’s over-ordering equipment such as computers, generators, and vehicles on an epic scale. Millions of dollars’ worth of equipment was left to rot in yards in the desert. logcap is also an “indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity” contract, which means that the Pentagon can go on commissioning whatever it wants from KBR whenever it wants. Instead of being subject to competitive bids, fresh items can be added to the contract at will: all officials have to do is issue a “task order.” These can be worth hundreds of millions of dollars—even billions, in the case of Task Order 59, which put KBR in charge of supporting the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.
I’d recommend reading the whole aneurysm inducing article.
mel starrs Opinion fraud, Halliburton, Iraq, KBR, Kellogg, over-ordering equipment, Pentagon, United States, Vanity Fair
I’ve activated a new plug-in from Intense Debate which I am hoping will make commenting a better experience for commenters. I’m not sure what will happen with the sidebar comments (another new feature recently added), but hopefully everything will work together.
Features of Intense Debate include:
don’t waste anymore time checking back in on a blog to see if anyone responded to your comment. Now you can get email notifications of replies to your comments, letting you know when the conversation continues while you’re gone.
I had previously tried CoComment to keep track of my own comments, but haven’t found it very portable when moving from computer to computer (as I am currently doing). Hopefully Intense Debate will fill the gaps. Let me know if you like/hate it.
mel starrs Uncategorized
This looks intriguing.
ABSTRACTS DUE February 1, 2008
ANNOUNCEMENTS of Accepted Papers March 1, 2008
COMPLETED DRAFTS DUE June 1, 2008
The Topic
Following successful Congresses in Berlin 2005 and Leeds 2006, the Council for European Urbanism will hold its third international congress in Oslo, Norway from the 14th to 16th September 2008.
The congress will discuss the rapidly-evolving topic of “Climate Change and Urban Design”. Papers are invited on the latest implications in science, policy, education and best practice. What is the latest science telling us? What are the consequences for urban development internationally? What are the practical solutions available to reduce climate gas emissions from urban settlements and transportation? What strategies are available to adapt to changing conditions?
The congress will welcome government officials, planners, architects, social scientists, ecologists, developers, local community activists, and all other development stakeholders who feel a responsibility to contribute to more sustainable urban development.
We invite authors engaged in urban development and climate change topics from all parts of the world to submit paper proposals with abstracts by February 1, 2008.
Announcements of accepted proposals will be on March 1, 2008. Completed drafts of papers will be due by June 1, 2008.
Topics look good ,especially:
THEME SIX: Innovative New Strategies
Papers in this category should discuss new theoretical or pragmatic approaches, such as certification schemes (LEED-ND in the USA, BREEAM in the UK, et al.), trading schemes, new coding approaches, and other innovations.
which we’ve been talking about recently and I’ve always fancied a trip to Norway.
mel starrs Uncategorized Berlin, BREEAM, Climate Change, climate gas emissions, conference, Council for European Urbanism, Leeds, Norway, oslo, United Kingdom, United States, urban design
As you can see, if you are not one of my 50 odd subscribers by RSS (at last folks seem to be catching onto the joy of RSS), I’ve changed the look of the blog (again). If you are one of my 50 odd subscribers, thank you and please stop by and have a poke at the new look blog.
I’m much happier with this look. As always, let me know if there’s anything wonky going on (the black text on blue background in my last incarnation was not a good look.
It’s a bit early to be talking of New Year resolutions and the like. However, now I have all the fun of NaBloPoMo behind me, I might just let the blog coast for a wee bit before embarking on a similar exercise come January, in an effort to finally rid myself of all the drafts in the bucket. The problem with writing a post a day is that it tends to generate ever more topics for discussion. So whilst I do some more tinkering, I’ll be thinking hard about BREEAM, BIM, M&A activity, job titles and the future of the workplace.
(edit: I managed to post this as a page instead of a post first go – yikes, too tired to think straight – a blog hiatus may be in order – sorry if things go quiet for a bit, but then any time I’ve threatened that in the past, a flurry of posts ensues. Hmmm)
(edit#2: in a blinding show of incompetence I’ve converted all my categories to tags. Whilst this means I have a lovely tag cloud to the side now, I have also made most of my posts ‘uncategorised’. Yikes. I’m going to have to go through and do some relabelling. Bear with me – it may take some time)
mel starrs Uncategorized Housekeeping, New Year\'s Day
BRE have just issued ’Micro-wind turbines in urban environments: an assessment’ (BRE Trust report FB17, ISBN 978-1-84806-021-0) and although I haven’t managed to get a copy myself the Guardian have and they dissect it here.
The gist of things is that micro-turbines aren’t a great idea in urban areas on a domestic scale. Good to see the BRE agreeing with what seems to be the general consensus of most folks I know. And now I have loads of data to beat people over the head with. Always a good thing…
mel starrs Uncategorized BRE Trust, Guidance Documents, renewables, the Guardian
Recent Comments