Elemental

As reported by Building4Change:

A new ISO standard aims to bridge the gap between regional and national environmental assessment methods by providing a common framework for them to be carried out.

ISO 21931-1:2010 highlights the key issues to be assessed at every stage of a construction project, from design through to operation and refurbishment or deconstruction. Each of these stages impact on a building’s environmental performance throughout its lifetime and assessment methods are integral in determining its overall sustainability.

There is a clear requirement in the construction sector for such assessments to not only be accurate but consistent. An internationally agreed framework will help ensure that buildings are constructed as sustainably as possible whilst enabling projects to be benchmarked and progress monitored.

I’ve read it, so you don’t have to. It’s only 38 pages long though, and most of those are taken up by definitions, so perhaps I’m not as civic minded as first appears.

I’m not sure how much I’m allowed to reproduce without infringing copyright law (10% rings a bell? can anyone clarify?), so I’ve kept the clippings to a minimum.

The ability to measure and understand the environmental performance of buildings is essential for communicating their potential environmental impacts and their influence on sustainable development.

However:

This part of ISO 21931 does not set benchmarks or levels of performance relative to environmental impacts and aspects.

The document is more of an umbrella (for Europe) which will provide common language to enable standards (such as BREEAM, HQE and DGNB) to be relatable to each other.

We’ve long debated if we’ll end up with one environmental standard to rule them all, or continue to have local, national schemes relevant to location. Sustainability tends to be context specific, so having localised standards makes sense (and the path BREEAM is following), and this framework ought to make things easier. Indeed this is picked up in section 4.3:

The environmental performance of a building is influenced by the characteristics of the climatic, social, economic and cultural context of the nation, region and site in which the building is located.

Subject to the aims and objectives of the assessment, the environmental performance of a building shall be expressed by absolute values. In addition, relative values may be used alongside the absolute values. Relative values refer to given contexts and should reflect regionally relevant benchmarks, as appropriate

This document is not specifically calling for data measurement to be exactly replicated across different schemes – there are moves afoot to define common carbon metrics which will make this much easier, but that is not the purpose of this document.

Lifecycle impacts are explicitly encouraged:

All life-cycle stages shall be considered in the assessment. When some stages are not considered or are excluded from the assessment, the reasons for such omission or exclusion shall be clearly explained in the methodology documentation. The assessment report shall state which life-cycle stages are included and which life-cycle stages are excluded.

Interestingly, in the list of impacts to be considered by an assessment method, notable by their absence are physical location and context of the building, and transport. This does not sit comfortably with me – I have never quite forgiven CSH for removing the transport credits from EcoHomes. I suspect given this guidance document, the same may happen in BREEAM.

The document, if anything, enables any European country to come up with their own assessment method. There is nothing in there which negates the use of either BREEAM nor LEED (although lifecycle calculations may need to be tightened up somewhat). In fact, both schemes as they currently stand cover more ground than that which this document calls for.

Do you need to read this document? Probably not. It gives a good broad overview of the benefits of environmental assessments, so might be useful for that.

And now you don’t need to read it. Aren’t I good to you all?

admin Book Review BREEAM, Europe, LEED, standardisation

The CAT Zero Carbon Britain 2030 report which came out 16 June 2010 has some interesting ideas in it, but I wasn’t immediately convinced by this one (as reported in the Ecologist):

Thirteen million hectares in Britain are used mainly for grazing livestock and growing feed for them. By cutting the numbers of cows (by 80-90 per cent) and sheep (by 80 per cent) we can cut methane emissions from livestock and switch the land to fast-growing energy crops like short rotation coppice. These can be used to produce heat and power.
It would mean a diet of less beef and lamb (50 per cent less meat and dairy produce overall) and a countryside landscape of fewer sheep-dotted fields and more tall woody crops.

News analysis – Zero carbon Britain: how to get there in 10 steps – The Ecologist

Now I wasn’t debating the cows here, but the sheep. Sheep are generally (barely) profitable on land which has little other use. Now, I’m no expert but surely coppicing requires a similar kind of land to crops – fairly flat and easy to harvest? Am I wrong? Most sheep farms are up rocky hills, surely?

This is the kind of countryside I think of, when I think of sheep farming. The report does allow for:

20% of sheep, with those remaining mostly in hill and upland areas;

There are carbon advantages in going vegetarian, but sheep provide wool, which is a very useful resource (clothes, insulation, lanolin etc). We would need to replace the calories from lamb with vegetable matter. The graph below is from the CAT report:

What’s missing from this graph is number of calories per tonne. For example, a kilo of lamb (raw leg joint) provides approximately 1680 calories. A kilo of potatoes (raw) provides approximately 720 calories. A kilo of apples provides about 480 calories. And of course we could start to look at protein involved too. It starts to get very complicated. If anyone has some good references (preferably not nef, I need someone else to compare to them), please leave me a comment.

Having skimmed through the food chapter I think the ‘sheep’ aspect may have been exaggerated by Ecologist – I must read it in more detail but I’m information rich, time poor right now, so if someone else can do so and summarise I’d be very grateful!

Apart from this tiny niggle, the rest of the ideas are fairly standard fare (for me anyhow – I understand the report is not necessarily aimed at those of us immersed in this stuff every day). I confess I haven’t read the report cover to cover (384 pages), but relied on reporting elsewhere to get the highlights.

Anyone read it and have any comments? As always, comments open

admin Book Review cat, NEF, report

I missed this report the first time around, but it is from RICS FiBRE (Findings in Built and Rural Environments) – Making the Business Case for Sustainable Buildings. It was brought to my attention through the UKGBC BREEAM consultation (apologies – UKGBC members only link).

A short 12 page report it is worth skimming through, but the main points can be illustrated with the graphics:

Which can be solved with:

Which leads to:

So where does BREEAM sit and where does it make sense for it to influence? BREEAM is not policy (not do I believe it should be), but it is a certification, which sits at the top right of the diagram. With the consultation currently ongoing, I have been taking some time to think about what the intention of BREEAM is. Still pondering…

The conference put forward five Key Messages
• Sustainable buildings are not any more expensive to build from the outset than conventional ones but their ownership can result in clear benefits for investors, ranging from drastically lower operating costs to improved marketability, longer useful life-spans, significantly increased occupant productivity and well-being as well as
more stable cash-flows which in turn have economically quantifiable benefits.
• Effort should be focused on the immense savings potential embedded in the existing building stock. Retrofitting and refurbishing the existing stock offers the most cost effective solution for reducing energy consumption.
• Unsustainable construction, investment and management practices will lead to accelerated building obsolescence and losses with regard to asset value and financial
performance.
• There needs to be a shift in marketing strategies for sustainable property towards a clear focus on user satisfaction and comfort all of which can enhance the prestige of the building.
• A truly sustainable property market needs to go beyond “green” and economic considerations and also embrace social sustainability.

Excellent messages and we’ve still got (lots of) work to do on all five.

admin Book Review FiBRE, RICS

A few years ago, just before I started this blog and around the time I started my MBA, I followed an eclectic bunch of folks on RSS. At the time there were not that many green blogs and even fewer construction industry ones, and the proportion of UK blogs was much lower. So my RSS feed consisted mostly of marketing, entrepreneur, venture capital and tech blogs from the US. In amongst them was an intriguing proposition called Escape from Cubicle Nation.

Pam‘s blog does exactly what it says on the tin. And now she has written a book, summarising the best posts and comments and condensing the advice into a highly readable tome.  Through the magic of Twitter, she requested reviewers to read and write reviews, so I offered to give a UK perspective. Happily, Pam was willing to ship the book over to me and over the last week or so I devoured it.

As you can probably tell already, I enjoyed Escape from Cubicle Nation. It is a lifestyle choice book, aimed squarely at those who are considering a career switch, from something safe and corporate, to something more scary, but ultimately fulfilling. Initially, I was worried that it might be a little too touchy feely, Oprah style. Whilst it’s most definitely not a “butch, get rich quick, stomp the competition and watch them weep” kind of book, it’s not at all prissy and condescending either. Neither is it a step by step “nuts and bolts” book, with spreadsheets and cash flow projections, although she offers plenty of advice as to where to find such resources. The book concentrates on the mental preparation involved in becoming an entrepreneur for the first time. It would also serve as a timely resource for those who find themselves at a career crossroads not of their own choosing, through redundancy.

Pam’s prose is chatty and funny, with healthy doses of reality thrown in. My favourite phrase from the book by far was:

hating your job intensely is not a business plan

From a UK perspective, the advice stands up to scrutiny. Obviously, as the book is aimed at an international market, specific technical financial advice would not be appropriate. Too often I read a book from the US and they are peppered with references to Roth IRA’s and 401k’s. Pam has the good sense to corral all this into chapter 13, which is specifically about addressing benefits (health insurance etc). Very easy to skip over, but at the same time it acts as a mental jog to check out your own situation.

The takeaway lessons from the book from me were the importance of building up a network of support before you make any leap and also the need to check the finances and if necessary plan to keep that ‘cubicle’ job in the short term to finance your dreams.

Why should you buy the book rather than just read the blog? I have a well established fondness for books and there’s something about being able to flag up pages and flick through a hard copy that online just can’t yet compete with. The book is 300 odd pages, whilst Pam’s archives (which I recommend, but for new readers may be daunting due to the sheer volume) has over 42 months of content.

Escape from Cubicle Nation does not release in the UK until 9 July 2009, so I’m truly grateful to Pam for letting me get my mits on it so early. I would heartily recommend it to anyone who is toying with the idea of starting their own business but has been put off by the image of the blood thirsty “personalities” which are portrayed as entrepreneurs in the UK media (such as Dragons Den and the Apprentice).

admin Book Review Book Review, entrepreneur, Pam Slim

Sometimes it’s good to get to events which don’t have a construction or buildings focus. Thanks to the magic of Twitter, I heard that Nick Stern (aka Professor Lord Stern of Brentwood) was presenting a public lecture about his new book at LSE on 21 April. I couldn’t pass on the opportunity to listen to a celebrated economist talk on 2 of my favourite topics after buildings – climate change and economics!

It’s been 2.5 years since the Stern review catapulted Nick into the public consciousness. Since leaving the government shortly afterwards he’s been keeping busy, proposing green new deal’s and writing “Blueprint for a Safer Planet“.

An mp3 of the event (76 mins) is available from the LSE website or the Guardian if you want to listen to the whole thing. Unfortunately the slides aren’t available. James Randerson has a slightly more coherent take on the event in the Guardian here. The FT also did a review of the book when it came out at the beginning of the month.

The need for addressing carbon was covered with a swift dash through the Hadley/IPCC climate data. I suspect most readers of this blog will know the headline figures, so I’ll not regurgitate here.

Three actions

1. Energy efficiency
2. Develop low carbon technologies and activities
3. Halt deforestation

He illustrated many of the cost issues with McKinsey’s now famous abatement curve (first published in January 2007, revised this year and available here – the full report is 190 pages).

How much will it cost? 1.95% of GDP (unless GDP drops). Stern admitted some flab in this number and cost is likely to drop with technological progress. Think of it as an insurance premium for a few decades. Drivers of growth over the next few years will be technological, towards a low carbon economy. Why not strive for zero growth now? He believes we need a growth story to deal with world poverty. We don’t need growth forever, afterall forever is a long time.

As it turns out, Stern’s views on CCS were fairly prescient, given the post-budget announcement that potentially all new coal power stations will have to have CCS. Stern asserted that CCS was fundamental, as we need to know quickly if can we do it in (i.e. in the next 10 years). 50% of the world’s electricity is currently coal fired. If not we move to plan B, which will be much more expensive. Developed countries have to take the lead on this to ensure China, India and other developing countries do not have any excuse not to follow it.

Some more in the press re:CCS since I went to the event – according to The Week (can’t find a direct link to the article) coal still provides a third of the UK’s electricity. Proportions abroad are much higher: 50% in the US, 70% in India and 80% in China. Ed Milliband’s requirement for CCS on new UK coal stations only covers 25% of their emissions, rising to 100% in 2025.

In the Q&A, we discussed political will. Stern made the very good point that if we want things to change, it is quite within our own remit to lobby politicians and businesses for the change – they are humans after all, and ought to listen to reason.

admin Book Review, Economics, Events CCS, Climate Change, coal, Economics, LSE, Nick Stern

David MacKay seems to be flavour of the month at the minute. I’m not sure whether it’s the Cory Doctorow review over at Boing Boing which triggered off this flurry of media awareness, as the book has been out for some time. Whatever it was, it worked. I’ve given up on remembering to read my digital version (downloaded from here) and bought the hard copy.

I might even review it (no promises – at the last count I have about 10 book reviews in various states of unfinishedness), but in the meantime some people who actually have posted reviews:

Chris Tweed

Derek Deighton

Best Foot Forward

And finally a great short video in which David himself explains energy use using the unit of a 40W lightbulb and cycles around in a rather dubious jumper.

admin Book Review David MacKay, UK energy consumption

Book cover via Amazon

So on my quest to read all those books we ‘green’ folks are supposed to have read, I mooched a copy of Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered by E. F. Schumacher and (more importantly) actually read it.

I have a couple of fuller formed posts to come out of reading the book (namely how businesses are set up and the thorny question of nuclear energy), but as an aide memoir to myself and a guide to you, the reader of my blog, I have my initial thoughts and comments on the book below.

The book is a collection of essays, but can be read as a book (with some repetition in sections). First, I’ll outline what the book is known for, and then what I thought of it.

So, the amazon blurb says (to give us some context and what we expect the book to be about):

First published in 1973, this controversial study looks at the economic structure of the western world in a revolutionary way. Schumacher maintains that man’s current pursuit of profit and progress, which promotes giant organizations and increased specialization, has in fact resulted in gross economic inefficiency, environmental pollution and inhumane working conditions. He challenges the doctrine of economic, technological and scientific specialization, and proposes a system of intermediate technology, based on smaller working units, communal ownership and regional workplaces, utilizing local labour and resources.

I should point out, I expected the book to be more about ‘how’, but in fact it is more about the ‘why’. I’m still searching for a manual on ‘how’ all this would work in practice (any recommendations out there?). That said, I was definitely ‘engaged’ with this book, veering from complete agreement to total and utter disbelief – always a good sign for a book which will make you think. It also has thrown up more questions than answers. Another good sign. I had also expected more of an explanation of zero-growth economics and how this might look. My expectations were misguided – this book does not answer this question.

Firstly, I’d like to point out how refreshing it is to read a book which does not one use the word sustainability. Worth reading just for some respite from that phrase and all it’s baggage. Instead Schumacher makes use of the term ‘permanence’ (pg: 26):

“From an economic point of view, the central concept of wisdom is permanence. We must study the economics of permanence. Nothing makes economic sense unless its continuance for a long time can be projected without running into absurdities. There can be ‘growth’ towards a limited objective, but there cannot be unlimited generalised growth. It is more likely, as Gandhi said, that ‘Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s need, but not for every man’s greed’. Permanence is incompatible with a predatory attitude which rejoices in the fact that ‘what were luxuries for our fathers have become necessities for us’.”

It worth remembering when assessing Schumacher’s views that this book is the same age as me. That makes some of his take on things somewhat quaint, though given it was written in the early seventies and not the fifties, maybe some of his views were already out of date (although he was 62 when he wrote the book). For instance, this one had me nicely seething (from pg. 47):

“Women, on the whole, do not need an ‘outside’ job, and the large-scale employment of women in offices or factories would be considered a sign of serious economic failure.”

Ouch. I don’t think Ernst and I would have agreed on this point.

My second niggle with Schumacher’s beliefs is in that humans need work, rather than leisure, for a good quality of life. Taking his first point, this raises some interesting questions regarding what equality he saw for women (was being chained to the kitchen sink equivalent to male ‘work’ (in his eyes, producing something for use in the local economy) – it’s not clear?). Secondly, this seems rather Calvinist to me, although a quick scan of Wikipedia reveals he had a fascination with Catholicism converting in 1971. At one point he bemoans the fact that no-one knows what the Seven Deadly Sins are anymore nor what the Four Cardinal Virtues are. Needless to say, he doesn’t list them (I had to go look them up: Sins: Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy and Pride, and Virtues: Prudence, Justice, Temperance and Courage, in case you were wondering). He also is preoccupied with metaphysics, which I won’t expand on yet as I am still trying to come to grips with what exactly he means by this? Nonetheless, he is wary of humanistic doctrines and especially wary of scientists (pg. 71):

“Science cannot produce ideas by which we could live. Even the greatest ideas of science are nothing more than working hypotheses, useful for purposes of special research but completely inapplicable to the conduct of our lives or the interpretation of the world. If, therefore, a man seeks education because he feels estranged and bewildered, because his life life seems to him empty and meaningless, he cannot get what he is seeking by studying any of the natural sciences, i.e.: by acquiring ‘know-how’. That study has its own value which I am not inclined to belittle; it tells him a great deal about how things work in nature or in engineering, but it tells him nothing about the meaning of life and can in no way cure his estrangement and secret despair.”

For those who have read James Lovelock‘s The Revenge of Gaia: Why the Earth is Fighting Back – and How We Can Still Save Humanity: Why the Earth Is Fighting Back – and How We Can Still Save Humanity (indeed a book which comes up as a recommendation on amazon given this one), it is interesting to see the polar opposition of opinions on science and it’s role. James has been an independent scientist for many years, an interesting observation given how Ernst then goes on to defend himself (pg. 118):

“To mention these things, no doubt, means laying oneself open to the charge of being against science, technology, and progress. Let me therefore, in conclusion, add a few words about future scientific research. Man cannot live without science and technology anymore than he can live against nature. What needs the most careful consideration, however, is the direction of scientific research. We cannot leave this to the scientists alone. As Einstein himself said, ‘almost all scientists are economically completely dependent’ and ‘the number of scientists who possess a sense of social responsibility is so small’ that they cannot determine the direction of research.”

So presumably Schumacher would have approved of Lovelock’s independence and his sense of social responsibility. An interesting question to ponder – would Lovelock have been able to develop his Gaia theory had he not been independent? How important a point is this?

Schumacher also has dim views of modern city living. Now, I have no problems with him having these views, but I question the basis of them, given that he makes no validation, either quantitative or qualitative. For instance from pg. 55:

“I think it is fairly safe to say that the upper limit of what is desirable for the size of a city is probably something of the order of half a million inhabitants. It is quite clear that above such a size nothing is added to the virtue of the city. In places like London, or Tokyo, or New York, the millions do not add to the city’s real value but merely create enormous problems and produce human degradation.”

Another observation is that, much like George Monbiot, Schumacher disapproves of travel (what he describes as a tendency for people to be ‘footloose’ given improvements in transport and communication), but only after he spent considerable time abroad, in his case Burma. The Burma references in the book are again rather unfortunate as he exalts the country as an example of how we should all be living given his experience of working there (unknowing of course how things would pan out in that country).

So how did E.F. Schumacher get out of bed in the morning, given that the economic reality of profit is so dismal to him? His conclusions (pg. 200):

“I thus come to the cheerful conclusion that life, including economic life, is still worth living because it is sufficiently unpredictable to be interesting.”

Ah, yes. May we all live in interesting times.

So has the book been hijacked and exalted to a position above it’s station by ‘green’ do-gooders? Does it still have relevance today? His primary message of self-sufficiency within local economies stems from his belief that (pg: 49):

“people who live in highly self-sufficient local communities are less likely to get involved in large-scale violence than people whose existence depends on world-wide systems of trade.”

Was that true in in 1973? Again, Scumacher offers no validation of this view. Even if it were true in 1973, is it still true today? I admire his pacifist tendencies, but yet? I would say I’m not convinced by his argument, but sadly he doesn’t argue – he just states it as fact. I’ve been convinced by arguments along the lines of democracy heralding peace? I found a reference from Keynes in the New Green Deal paper which expands on Schumacher’s points regarding full employment and self-sufficiency (Keynes rescued Schumacher from internment during the war):

“If nations can learn to provide themselves with full employment by their domestic policy there need be no important economic forces calculated to set the interest of one country against that of its neighbours. International trade would cease to be what it is, namely, a desperate expedient to maintain employment at home by forcing sales on foreign markets and restricting purchases, which, if successful, will merely shift the problem of unemployment to the neighbour which is worsted in the struggle, but a willing and unimpeded exchange of goods and services in conditions of mutual advantage.”

I obviously have more research to do on this point then…

Schumacher’s prescience regarding fossil fuels is undoubtedly what has kept this on the ‘green’ reading list for 35 years. His predictions of population are also very accurate.

My initial exposure to the book has previously come from bloggers such as Dave Pollard (fairly dark green Canadian) and references from Rob Hopkins’ Transition Towns movement. Both these camps and others seem to have taken Schumacher’s original idea and run further with it. I need to do some more thinking on where I stand on this but I suspect I veer away from their opinions. I’m still a fan of the global view for reasons which I hope to touch on in future post, but I’m willing to be persuaded otherwise.

I would recommend reading Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, for context if nothing else. It is fascinating looking back 35 years through the lens of hindsight and the book (with some exceptions as I have mentioned) stands up fairly well to the intervening years.

mel starrs Book Review Climate Change, E. F. Schumacher

I’m an avid reader, a bookworm, a bibliomane, call it what you will. I’m seldom caught without a book in my bag. I’ve just finished several non-fiction which have been gathering dust on my shelves and before I launch into a few reviews I thought I’d share my top 7 tips for reading, in particular non-fiction (with a major hat-tip to Ben for writing about this very topic back in March 2007 and also to Alan Bennett’s The Uncommon Reader which in itself is fiction but expresses the joy and wonder that comes from reading in a way I can never hope to capture here).

1. Read often. Books are very versatile. They need no wifi connection, bootup nor power supply. Indeed, all that is required is adequate light, shelter from rain (if required) and that’s about it. If you have time to kill (say, 5 minutes and upwards) and aren’t driving, pick up a book. (Driving and reading is not recommended, despite temptations at traffic lights. Audio books may be a useful alternative but suffer from the lack of ability to mark up and notate). I currently tote around an enormous handbag which usually contains a non-fiction book, notebooks and stationery (see below). This is not great for my posture but fantastic at relieving boredom. I’m yet to be convinced that digital book readers are the way forward (Kindle, Sony READER E-BOOKet al) but the thought of bringing as many books I want on holiday is very appealing?
2. Think about what you  are reading. Make notes, comments and flag up passages you might want to refer to in the future. This discipline came to me partly via my MBA. Much as I try to kid myself that I’ll be able to retrieve a certain passage or quotation from my brain, I just can’t. I try not to leave home without either my notebook (currently a nifty A6 hardback leather number), a highlighter (more often used in printed pdf’s than ‘real’ books or which I still have a reverance borne of being a librarian’s daughter) or my sticky coloured labels (known as index flags or page markers – not my usual ‘stickies’, who knew?) and a host of biros (in my old-skool pencil case I also carry my spork, for when I need cutlery. Can you tell I was a girl guide?).
3. Record what you read. This is related to my point above, but it makes sense to record what date you read stuff. I use Librarything for this and it’s been useful to track what books I’ve read, what I thought of them (occasionally I blog about books too, which has been very useful and something I ought to do more of), and how many books I’ve read in a year (I know it’s not a race but here’s a sobering thought – at a rate of 75 books a year and a projected lifespan of 75, I have only 3000 more books to read – pants! Also, choose your books well and don’t be afraid to dump bad books given this thought)
4. Keep a wishlist. I keep my wishlist on Bookmooch. This has several purposes, the most appealing of which is keeping my reading affordable. It also mean I can source scarce books or those published only in the states. I also keep wishlists on amazon, on RTM and scribbled in various notebooks and on post-its. Whilst I got good at the writing stuff down bit of Getting Things Done, keeping things all in one place is taking longer. I also keep snippets of online reading in my Google Notebooks. The advantage to surrendering to this way of implementing Getting Things Done, by the way, is that I’m never in the wrong place to do my stuff. If I hear of a good book whilst say listening to the radio or browsing in a bookshop, I can text it to myself using twitter and RTM. If I find one when I’m online, I add it straight to Bookmooch or if I really can’t wait, buy it straight from amazon. Entering into bookshops is a dangerous pasttime for me – I’m trying to limit my exposure in an effort to curb the massive number of books I’m accruing.
5. keepers vs. moochers. Much of what I read, I keep, especially non-fiction. In fact, there are a couple of books on my wishlists which I read and either gave away or had borrowed in the first place and which I now want to refer back to. Anything I don’t have a use for, goes back onto Bookmooch. These tend to be the short, bite-sized, unreferenced fluff which sometimes make it onto top 10 best seller lists and I fall for. I’m getting better at not doing this, but as I said before, if you pick up a lemon – there is no need to finish it. Drop it and move on.
6. Read broad, read deep and question everything. How do I pick the books I read? It’s a question of connections, much like a family tree. I start somewhere (usually something which interests me and I broadly agree with) and then by reading that, other paths open up and off I go. I’m a great advocate of reading a wide selection of topics (economics, food production, nutrition, climate change, religion, history, philosophy, business, management, entrepreneurship, etc) and then when I find something which piques my interest reading deep into it. To read deep, you have to read alternative points of view. It’s impossible to argue a position unless you know what your opposition thinks. Whilst I wouldn’t recommend that you go off and read Ann Coulter straight after reading say, Richard Dawkins (that might be too extreme a variance to take in!), I do recommend you question what you read and be aware of your own confirmation bias. The father of an acquaintance is an old socialist who religiously reads the FT everyday – so he knows “what the enemy are up to”.
7. reading non-fiction before sleep = insomnia. My final tip is a simple one. Don’t read stuff which will fire off your neurons just before you retire to bed. That’s a recipe for insomnia. Read some fiction instead – I like mental fluff such the John Rain books by Barry Eisler or the Ian Rankin Rebus books, but whatever floats your boat…

mel starrs Book Review books, Getting Things Done, READING

Discussions have been launched here. Go, join in…

mel starrs Book Review Bill McDonough, cradle to cradle

Just a quick note to let readers know I am proposing a virtual book group on the Building Sustainability Forum in a few weeks time.  As of yesterday lunchtime, 60 people have had a look, but only one responded to the post – anyone else up for it?

Wondering if anyone would like to try out a virtual book group on this forum? The idea is simple. Suggest a non-fiction book with a sustainability theme and a date for discussion. Go away and read the book. A couple of days before the date of discussion, the proposer outlines some questions for discussion. On the day of the discussion, everyone weighs in to answer the questions and throw in any other opinions.

To kick things off, I propose “cradle to cradle” by William McDonough & Michael Braungart.

If anyone expresses an interest (please reply below) I’ll post some discussion points on Tuesday 27th May, and have the discussion on Thursday 29th May. Then whoever wants can pick the next book.

Any takers?

I chose Cradle to Cradle as I know a few people might have it on their bookshelves already.  If not, try the local library or Bookmooch (none currently listed for mooching) for cheap/free ways to get your hands on it.  Or feel free to click through on the amazon link in the text above and then I’ll get some pennies to feed my book addiction…

BTW, apologies to anyone trying to read this in IE6 – the formatting is completely skew whiff.  Has been added to my list of things to look into…

mel starrs Book Review Bill McDonough, book group, cradle to cradle