Re posting: Why cork wine stoppers are best

I'm re-posting this post from last May, which is suddenly a bit topical following a BBC Natural World documentary broadcast last night on the subject of the Iberian cork forests. This unique habitat is home to many rare birds as well as the critically endangered Iberian lynx. If you live in the UK, watch it now on iPlayer. But hurry because you have 6 days and counting.

If you care even a tiny bit, please also join this Facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=45636837750

**************************************

Anyone who knows me will already know that I tend to turn my wine snob's nose up at bottles with plastic corks or screw-cap closures. This distaste is has two sources.

1/ As any wine lover will tell you, wine breathes, ages and evolves better in a cork closed bottle. Why is this so? Well, for a wine to continue to mature once it's been bottled, there must be a continuing exchange between the wine in the bottle and the air surrounding the bottle (if you're lucky, this will be the cool and relatively humidity-stable air of a good cave). Plastic corks and screw-caps hermetically seal the wine meaning it cannot age. This is fine if the wine is intended for consumption within... max 2 years after bottling, but it is equivalent to suffocating a Saint Estèphe or a Vosne Romanée.

2/ Environmental issues. A plastic cork is just downright bad for the environment. It's made from petro-chemicals. It doesn't biodegrade and probably most plastic corks end up in the household rubbish bin with no hope of being recycled.
A traditional cork, however, is good from beginning to end. Natural cork is harvested from cork oaks (Quercus suber), with the largest production areas to be found in Spain and Portugal. The cork oak forests are ancient mixed-farming areas, combining forest and grazing pasture. Because the harvesting of the bark is done using traditional methods and involves no mechanical techniques, the habitat is preserved. Animals such as the endangered Iberian lynx and Spanish eagle rely on these forests and suffer from their conversion to intensively-farmed agricultural land.

To help preserve these essential habitats, and ensure a future for cork oak farmers in Europe and elsewhere around the Mediterranean, you can make a difference by choosing to buy wine with a natural cork stopper and steering clear of plastic and screw-caps. Some UK retailers are now indicating the type of closure used on their wines either in their online catalogues or in store. But they are also applying pressure to their wholesalers and suppliers to provide wine with plastic or screw-cap closures. You can help by just not buying these wines, writing to the supermarkets and retailers, and writing directly to suppliers to give your views. Consumer pressure does make a difference.

And the biggest thing you can do to help is boycott all wine from Morrison's. Or better still, boycott their stores altogether. This is because Liz Robertson, former head of wine for Safeway (now Morrison's), is stupid. She said "We think that plastic stoppers are good for the environment because they relieve pressure on the cork groves and prevent over-harvesting.” Clearly, she has NO IDEA at all. Cork oak farming is probably the only form of farming in Europe today that doesn't involve over-harvesting. And yes, something made from hydrocarbons and that doesn't bio-degrade and isn't recycled is obviously good for the environment. Of course.

Some links to find out more:
Newsmonster article
RSPB articles
Independent.co.uk article
Real Cork campaign
Environmental news service article
WWF Mediterranean Cork Oak conservation project

What's your point ,caller?

So what *is* my point? What is the point of this blog? Do I have anything useful to say? And why is the wifi so bleedin' slow today?

First I have long overdue blushing thanks for Mya's nomination of this blog for a glittering prize. One day hopefully quite soon I'll display it with pride. But for now I'll just say "thank you, Mya, I'm touched".

I have lots of blogs to catch up on. I lazily technorati'd this morning to check out the latest news from my "favourite" blogs. Was upset to see that the dazzling Miss D has been struggling with her demons, and indignant to read Sugar's story of her freaky date and how all men just want to bed you. And there's lots else going on in the blogosphere and look how behind I've got!

I still don't seem to be able to hold on to an idea long enough to be able to write one down. I so want to blog about just what we've been up to (braderie last weekend, it was really warm and we made about 200 euros - yay!), what we're going to be doing (visit home soon-ish), and just generally give forth on anything and everything (as I'm prone to do)... But my mind is in a big rush and won't let me take the time to make up a proper post on anything. So you're just getting a sort of stream-of-consciousness pile of nonsense. Sorry!

So we did the braderie. It was hot (in October?!). We sold champagne corks (no kidding).

Hubby had an interview in Brussels on Wednesday but we don't really know what for. That doesn't make any sense. The employer is an IT services company and the job would be as a "consultant". But no further information. The compensation package sounded very generous so it probably means they expect you to work 10 hours a day. Every day. Hmm.

On Friday, Hubby got a call from a company in the UK that had already contacted him a couple of weeks ago. They want to arrange a telephone interview. Exciting!

I made Greek stuffed tomatoes out of my Rick Stein book. Surprisingly managed not to butcher any other fingers (last week I did some amateur amputation surgery with a Sabatier paring knife on my little finger - damn sharp them knives). They were a bit fiddly to make but really pretty tasty.

I also think I've accidentally stumbled on some kind of time warp/hole/thing. In the office, we don't have Earth minutes, we have Work minutes. They must only contain about 22 Earth seconds, and probably a Work hour lasts about 13 Earth minutes. This is the only possible explanation for how quickly the days whizz by. Except there is also a sort of reverse time warp that happens when someone says "I'll send you the files in about ten minutes", and two hours later, you still haven't received them...

I opened my last pack of tea bags this morning. I only have about 42 tea bags left. We're going to Scotland in 3½ weeks. Two cups of tea a day into 42 tea bags doesn't add up to enough tea until we go. Even mathematically-challenged Lis can work that out (and I didn't even need a pen and paper to do the sums)!

I wanted to debate (well, have a one-sided rant) about the hypocrisy of being a member of Les Verts (political party not unlike The Green Party, surprisingly enough), but nevertheless driving one's child to school every morning although you only live about a fifteen minute walk away (with no busy roads to cross en route). I don't get how you can join a party that claims to fight for the environment, but pollute so wantonly and pointlessly. But there is nothing to debate. The person in question is a hypocrite. End of.

I also want to know why the eco-mental green-friendly liquid hand soap is only sold by the dispenser-load. I mean, they don't sell refills. You have to buy a whole new dispenser each time. It doesn't make any sense.

And lastly, I'd like you all to have a look at the Earth Clock. And think on. Thanks to maxxo for leading me to that. Maxxo is a clockwork bunny who likes brewing nice cups of tea. I think she sounds interesting.

Say no to plastic bags

Come on Britain, why not follow Uganda's example and banish plastic bags?? They're made from oil, they don't biodegrade, they litter the streets, countryside, rivers and seas. They poison the soil and choke animals, birds and marine life.

I confess to feeling slightly righteous about this. Most French supermarkets have already stopped handing out free plastic bags. You have to bring your own (most people have those bag for life ones), or plastic or cardboard boxes. I've already covered that subject in more depth here.

Do something positive, next time you're at the supermarket, don't grab all the free bags (you probably take far more than you need anyway - you know you can carry more than a loaf of bread and a punnet of strawberries in one bag?). Buy a bag for life and remember to take it with you on future trips.

You don't need the throw-away plastic bags. Because that's what happens to them - they get thrown away and finish up scarring the land. They make the whole country look like a tip, strewn along motorway verges and blowing around high streets. BAN THE BAGS.

Why cork wine stoppers are best

Anyone who knows me will already know that I tend to turn my wine snob's nose up at bottles with plastic corks or screw-cap closures. This distaste is has two sources.

1/ As any wine lover will tell you, wine breathes, ages and evolves better in a cork closed bottle. Why is this so? Well, for a wine to continue to mature once it's been bottled, there must be a continuing exchange between the wine in the bottle and the air surrounding the bottle (if you're lucky, this will be the cool and relatively humidity-stable air of a good cave). Plastic corks and screw-caps hermetically seal the wine meaning it cannot age. This is fine if the wine is intended for consumption within... max 2 years after bottling, but it is equivalent to suffocating a Saint Estèphe or a Vosne Romanée.

2/ Environmental issues. A plastic cork is just downright bad for the environment. It's made from petro-chemicals. It doesn't biodegrade and probably most plastic corks end up in the household rubbish bin with no hope of being recycled.
A traditional cork, however, is good from beginning to end. Natural cork is harvested from cork oaks (Quercus suber), with the largest production areas to be found in Spain and Portugal. The cork oak forests are ancient mixed-farming areas, combining forest and grazing pasture. Because the harvesting of the bark is done using traditional methods and involves no mechanical techniques, the habitat is preserved. Animals such as the endangered Iberian lynx and Spanish eagle rely on these forests and suffer from their conversion to intensively-farmed agricultural land.

To help preserve these essential habitats, and ensure a future for cork oak farmers in Europe and elsewhere around the Mediterranean, you can make a difference by choosing to buy wine with a natural cork stopper and steering clear of plastic and screw-caps. Some UK retailers are now indicating the type of closure used on their wines either in their online catalogues or in store. But they are also applying pressure to their wholesalers and suppliers to provide wine with plastic or screw-cap closures. You can help by just not buying these wines, writing to the supermarkets and retailers, and writing directly to suppliers to give your views. Consumer pressure does make a difference.

And the biggest thing you can do to help is boycott all wine from Morrison's. Or better still, boycott their stores altogether. This is because Liz Robertson, former head of wine for Safeway (now Morrison's), is stupid. She said "We think that plastic stoppers are good for the environment because they relieve pressure on the cork groves and prevent over-harvesting.” Clearly, she has NO IDEA at all. Cork oak farming is probably the only form of farming in Europe today that doesn't involve over-harvesting. And yes, something made from hydrocarbons and that doesn't biodegrade and isn't recycled is obviously good for the environment. Of course.

Some links to find out more:
Newsmonster article
RSPB articles
Independent.co.uk article
Real Cork campaign
Environmental news service article
WWF Mediterranean Cork Oak conservation project

Online archive of life on earth

Saw this article about the Encyclopaedia of Life project. A praise-worthy undertaking, I'm sure you will agree. However, I think that 10 years to catalogue the 1.8 million or so plant and animal species is cutting it fine. Or maybe they're going to start with South China tigers and white rhinos, for example, to make sure they catalogue them before they disappear from our fragile home?

As an aside, why can't Americans spell? It's encyclopAedia. ;))

Don't go to Cyprus either

Why? Try this for a good reason. Another country that cares little for wildlife conservation, feeling it is more important to give blood-thirsty hunters a better chance at killing higher numbers of a species that is already declining in Europe. What flippin' chance do the birds get?!

Holiday destinations: where NOT to go

May I suggest nobody takes a holiday in Malta? I would personally not want to fund the economy of country where this goes on (don't look at the pics if you are of a delicate disposition, or if you hate needless killing of wildlife).

I find this all very distressing, but am heartened to see that good old Europe (!) might be stepping in to stop this. Of course, this activity is already illegal under EU law (see directive 79/409/EEC), but the Maltese government seems to be unable (unwilling) to enforce this. Now let's be clear, I am not all out, blanket anti-hunting. What I deeply object to and find quite sickening and repulsive, is the needless slaughter of so many increasingly rare species just for fun.

The Federation for Hunting and Conservation Malta argues that spring is the best time of year to enjoy the countryside.

Oh right, I didn't realise "enjoying the countryside" entailed the mass and unnecessary murder of some poor feathery creatures who just happened to fly by. It would seem I'll have to get me a gun if I'm to continue "enjoying the countryside".

You can find out more about the Birdlife Malta campaign to put a stop to this destruction. I was hoping for an online petition but there doesn't seem to be one. Still, worth a look.

Start-Stop system on cars should be mandatory

This afternoon, after work, I treated the car to a carwash. Probably not very eco-friendly in terms of water use, but it's something we do maybe once a year, soooo...

Anyway, when I arrived in the queue, there was a car in the carwash, and two cars ahead of me waiting. Just after I parked up a car arrived behind me. I had turned off my engine, because if you are going to be stopped for more than 30s, it's best to switch off, as you'll inevitably use more fuel idling your engine than you will restarting it. So I waited in the queue and waited, and finally it was my turn. And as I stood at the machine thing where you choose your wash programme, I noticed that the chap in the car that had arrived after me was running his engine. In fact, he'd probably never switched it off since he'd been queuing. That was probably FIFTEEN MINUTES of waiting time!

There are two aspects I haven't been able to get my head around. 1/ He must be really well off if he can waste fuel so wantonly; 2/ He must never have heard the words 'carbon footprint', 'greenhouse gases' or 'climate change'.

My idea: bring in legislation requiring ALL new cars sold in Europe to incorporate technology to the Stop and Start system offered by Citroen (sadly only on one of its cars). Would need some fine-tuning (like not relying on the sole use of the footbrake to keep the car stationary at lights) but it's a good start. Because I see far too many blithering fools sitting in the car with the engine running when they are clearly not going anywhere. And it would go some small way to achieving carbon emissions targets.

Recyling, waste collections and landfill

The online edition of The Independent published this leader today:

Leading Article: No time to waste

Published: 27 April 2007

This newspaper's campaign against the excessive and wasteful packaging that supermarkets and retailers use to enshroud their products is making real progress. As we report today, MPs are prepared to press for tougher laws against excess packaging. The major UK supermarket chains are promising action. Asda is asking its customers in two stores to inform them of excessive packaging so it can take up the matter with suppliers.

Interestingly, all this has coincided with a fierce row over refuse collection. Fortnightly, rather than weekly, collections for non-recyclable waste have been adopted of late by more than one-third of councils. This has prompted complaints that leaving organic matter in bins for two weeks is unhygienic and encourages infestations.

First, let us acknowledge the pressures behind this shift. The EU has set a target of 2010 for the UK to reduce its landfill use. This is quite right. The UK dumps more household waste into landfill than any other EU nation. And councils claim this is behind their policy of fortnightly collections, pointing out that this tends to increase recycling rates. Householders find their waste bin for non-recyclable rubbish fills up, which encourages them to use the space in their "green" bin.

Yet there is a flaw in this reasoning. European countries, several of which have far higher recycling rates than the UK, seem to manage weekly refuse collections. To this extent, the critics of the fortnightly collection have a point. Where they do not is in labelling Gordon Brown's increased levy on council landfill dumping as just another stealth tax. Landfill is an increasingly scarce public resource. Britain's landfill space is on course to run out in the next decade. It needs to be priced to reflect this. Such critics should direct some of their anger at the lingering lack of transparency regarding recycling in Britain. There is a considerable amount of confusion about what can be recycled and what cannot. And different councils have very different methods. Some sort all recyclable refuse themselves. Others demand total separation by householders of everything from tins to plastic. This confusion, as much as the fortnightly collections, is an irritant to the public.

We must not lose sight of the bigger picture. Other European countries are so far ahead in recycling that catching up is going to be painful. There will be missteps along the way. But what is clear is that these issues - excess packaging, recycling, the environment - are entering the political arena. This is not before time - the status quo is wasteful and unsustainable.

This is another occasion for me to feel righteous... Living here in the village, we have had "selective sort" wheelie bins since we moved to this house more than five years ago. The system works thus: we have two smallish wheelie bins, both split into two compartments. In one bin, we put paper and cardboard in the first compartment, and tins, cans, plastic bottles, glass bottles and Tetrapak cartons in the second compartment. In the other bin there is a compartment for green waste (grass cuttings, banana skins, potato peel, eggshells, coffee grounds, etc.). In the other compartment goes all that's leftover after you've sorted your rubbish into the first three compartments.

The refuse people collect the bins twice a week. On Thursday, a specially-adapted lorry empties the green and general waste bin, and on Friday they take the paper and bottles bin. At the waste management centre, people then sort through the plastic and glass bottles, milk cartons and drinks cans, further sorting them. The compostable waste is put in a huge industrial composter/compressor that heats it and squashes it, which produces compost in super quick time. That is then sold, I believe, to local farmers and market gardeners. The general household waste is incinerated. This is the only part of the process I don't really feel comfortable with, what with all those dioxins and what have you...

So what's all the fuss about? What is so difficult about introducing a similar system in the UK? I also don't really understand the big debate about fortnightly collections. I would be perfectly happy with fortnightly collections, providing my bin was a bit bigger (you really can only get about three 30l bin bags in it, which would be a bit tight for two weeks). I put my waste in a bin bag, and when it's full I tie them up using the bit of plastic string that comes with them, and I tie them up good and tight. And I always make sure the bin lid is snuggly closed. No hygiene worries there, surely?

Again, the problem appears to stem partly from a lack of "education". If councils explained the system with a bit more care, maybe people would understand the objectives and would adhere to the whole operation. As an aside, councils really do need to better explain what garden waste is, or what it is not. I saw a news report with a woman complaining that they hadn't emptied her bin because they said she was putting the wrong rubbish in. A quick check revealed plastic plant pots and paint tins in her garden waste bin. Just because you used it in the garden, doesn't make it garden waste...

Well done Thames Water

Taken from the Scotsman website (scotsman.com)

Public warned to stay out of Forth after sewage spill

GARETH ROSE

COUNCIL chiefs last night warned the public to avoid contact with the water in the Firth of Forth after it emerged that sewage had been released into the estuary.

The contamination has been blamed on a mechanical failure at Edinburgh's Seafield sewage works, which led to a thousand litres of sewage a second being fed into the firth for more than 24 hours.

Edinburgh council warned people to stay out of the water, wash their hands thoroughly if they have visited the area, and not to eat fish or shellfish caught there because of the risk of bacterial diseases.

Thames Water, which runs the sewage works, was yesterday trying to install a temporary pump to stop the sewage entering the Forth, which was expected to be in place by midnight.

Mesh around the pipes meant there was no danger of solid waste entering the river, the company said.

However, Thames Water it they had no option but to allow contaminated water to filter through.

A spokeswoman said: "We were unable to repair the pump on site.The breakdown meant the sewage could not be directed to the treatment facility.

"We had to allow an emergency outflow into the Forth - if we had not done that it would have been directed on to land.

"It was discharging about one thousand litres a second, however it was very, very heavily diluted by the time it entered the water.

"And we have screening so no solids would have been able to get into the Forth."

She added: "We will now have to take the regular equipment away to get that repaired and hopefully it will be back within the next couple of weeks."

It is the first time in the seven years Thames Water has run the sewage system at Seafield that such an outbreak has affected the Forth.

A spokesman for the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) said: "It is too early to tell what the extent of the impact has been. We will need to keep an eye on the station and see what happens."

Warning notices were posted along the banks of the Forth yesterday. Environmental health officers have been carrying out beach inspections but have not found any signs of sewage or contaminated water.

It is not known how great a part of the Forth has been affected. People who use the firth for recreational pursuits such as yachting have been advised to take care and avoid contact with the water.

Edinburgh council leader Ewan Aitken said: "We are very concerned about this incident and are working closely with Scottish Water, Thames Water, Sepa and neighbouring authorities to resolve the issue. We urge people to ensure they maintain high standards of personal hygiene and do not take anything home from the beach."

People who remain concerned about the dangers have been advised to contact the council's environmental health service.

The incident comes less than a month after Scottish Water unveiled a three-year £130m project to upgrade its network of treatment facilities across the Lothians.

That includes the £50m Edinburgh Drinking Water Project to improve the quality of water in the capital and the upgrading of the city's water treatment works at Alnwickhill, which have been operating since 1879.

The water treatment works at Fairmilehead will either be upgraded or replaced with a purpose-built facility in Midlothian.

Thousands of residents in West and East Lothian will also get improved drinking water.

Well ...ing done Thames Water!!!

The BBC website claims "Urgent work to stem sewage spill". Pff, doesn't sound like they're working so urgently to me. This is has been going on since Friday, mind. I have two questions:
1/ Why are there no containment/overflow pools to deal with this sort of incident?
2/ Why does it take so bloody long to fix/replace a pump? Did they have to order one to be built from scratch using components found in Taiwan and assembled in Mexico????????

It is an absolute disgrace. The full extent of the damage remains to be seen for some time.

Send some useful email

While I'm on my conservationist/ecological tirade, why don't you stop by the FoE site and send some useful email:
http://foe.org.uk/press_for_change/index.html
Take your pick from climate change to fair trade to waste management. Many worthy issues. Go on, click the link.

Kill, plunder, destroy

These seem to be the things the human race excels at the most. Saw in the news today that the Chinese government is thinking of lifting its ban on tiger products in medicines. Of course, it's only a pretend ban anyway because it hasn't stopped the poachers.

With a population of only 5000 (all species) it really does look like these most handsome big cats could be heading the same way as the dodo, and within the next 20 years. The South China tiger is the most at risk, not only does it live in China (poor soul), but only 30 to 40 of them remain.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/6450871.stm

Climate change is hot news

Have you noticed that not a day goes by without a news item on climate change, energy savings, renewables, recylcing or some other environment-related issue on TV news or in the papers?

I suppose the optimist in me sees this as a signal that people really have realised that human activity is speeding up the changes in Earth's climate. OK, for the doubters out there, the climate does go through periods of natural change, yes, but our pollution (carbon emissions and destruction of the ozone layer - remember that?) has certainly accelerated any natural changes.

The not-so-optimist in me thinks more cynically that it's merely "trendy" to be seen to be aware of all these issues and to fly the eco-flag.

I'll be convinced when I see real change happening. I'll be convinced when all new-build housing incorporates solar panels, rain-water collection, triple glazing, and so on. I'll be convinced when blasted incandescent light bulbs disappear from the world! Why isn't that happening right now? I'll be convinced when urban street lighting becomes efficient, with minor and low-cost measures like putting "hats" on street lights mean the electricity used lights the ground and not the sky (and maybe mean energy savings too?). I'll be convinced when I no longer see people sitting in parked cars, clearly not going anywhere, with the engine running. What is that all about? Those people clearly have money to burn, quite literally, and must also be lacking a brain.

I despair!

Don’t like this one bit

Read a disturbing article in the newspaper:

Stop subsidies for plundering of the deep seas, say scientists

By Steve Connor Science Editor

Published: 20 February 2007

Marine biologists have called on the fishing nations of the world to end government subsidies of fishing fleets that are plundering the deep seas and permanently stripping the ocean floor of its unique lifeforms.

Fish that live for more than 100 years and cold-water coral reefs that have taken millennia to form are being destroyed by the "roving bandits" of the high seas that could not survive without government aid.

Government subsidies are being used to prop up the international trade in deep-sea fishing that is causing the serial and long-term depletion of the deep seabed, the scientists said.

Japan, South Korea, Russia and Spain lead the list of nations that are sanctioning the pillage of the deep ocean with public money which is diverted into subsidies to pay to fuel and equip trawlers, the scientists said.

Robert Steneck, a fisheries expert at the University of Maine, said: "The unregulated catches of these roving bandits are utterly unsustainable. With globalised markets, the economic drivers of over-fishing are physically removed and so fishermen have no stake in the natural systems they affect.

"While it may be a good short-term business practice to fish out stocks and move on, we now see global declines of targeted species," Dr Steneck told the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Francisco.

"The solution is not going into the deep sea but better managing the shallow waters where fish live fast and die young, and ecosystems have a greater potential for resilience," he said.

A study found that more than $152m (£78m) in government subsidies was paid each year to maintain deep-sea trawling vessels around the world. Without that money, the international business would run at a loss of about $50m a year.

Most of the subsidies are used to pay for the fuel needed to sail beyond the 200-mile, economic exclusion zones - far enough out to areas where international rules about fishing are so lax that conservationists refer to it as the least-protected place on Earth.

Deep-sea trawling involves dragging 15-ton weights across the seabed to break up corals and rocks so that fish can be scooped up into vast nets.

The trawling is so fuel-intensive that it takes between 5kg and 8kg of fuel to catch 1kg of fish, according to Daniel Pauly of the University of British Columbia.

"There is surely a better way for governments to spend money than by paying subsidies to a fleet that burns 1.1 billion litres of fuel annually to maintain paltry catches of old-growth fish from highly vulnerable stocks, while destroying their habitat in the process," he said.

"Eliminating global subsidies would render these fleets economically unviable," he said.

As fish stocks around shallow, continental shelves have declined and collapsed, fishing fleets have gone further afield into deeper waters to catch fish that in previous decades were considered too low value to be worthwhile.

Selina Heppell of Oregon State University said deep-sea species such as the orange roughy and Chilean sea bass are very slow to grow and can take many years to reach sexual maturity. "When you buy orange roughy, you are probably purchasing a fillet that is at least 50 years old. Most people don't think of the implications of that - perhaps we need a guideline that says we shouldn't eat fish as old as our grandmother," she said.

Am all the more disturbed to learn that as a tax-payer in France, my money is subsidising this practice. It makes me feel quite unwell actually, I mean physically sick-y.

134 plastic bags before the end of the year

http://www.foe.co.uk/living/tips/plastic_bags.html
So all you Brit readers will be using 134 plastic bags each before the year is out. That's a disgrace. I hereby have a gloating opportunity to feel righteous. Here in France, nearly every major supermarket chain no longer hands out free plastic bags. You have several alternative choices:
- get a few of those "bag for life" bags for €1.50 (about £1) each and remember to leave them in the car boot for the weekly shop
- buy a biodegradable bag each time you go shopping. I think these cost about €0.30.
- stick all your shopping in your trolley, then in your car boot, loose and unbagged. Not recommended if you bought eggs.
- you get the idea.
And I think this is highly commendable. Some other major non-grocery retail chains are also jumping on the bandwagon.

Also commendable is the clothing retailer Zara and perfume chain store Sephora - they give you a free bag, but it's made from paper. Better.

Of course, cynics will say that the decision to stop giving out free plastic bags is a financial one. Certainly is. This decision will save the supermarkets and other retailers heaps of cash. And not only the savings of not having to buy the bags, they won't have to pay to have the bags driven from warehouses to their stores in trucks, and they won't have those storage costs to foot either. And they can be righteous in their greenness. And us shoppers can also feel righteous in our greenness. Winners all round.

As far as I know, the only retailer to do this in the UK is Ikea. And they get accused of being cheap. Maybe this policy does save money for them, but it also helps the planet. So free yourselves from plastic bag addiction now. Every little helps, right?

Some good news at last

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6229695.stm

It's about time! These sorts of vehicles are just a whole big load of nonsense!!