Following on from the follow-up post to my original post on rainwater diverters and honest, the site hasn’t turned into some kind of pseudo green DIY forum I’d just for information’s sake like to put up the results of my inquiry to Marley.

Marley unfortunately at this time don’t sell anything in the UK comparable to the DN75 that they sell in Germany and this of course doesn’t fit to British Standard UK downpipes. (Mine was a funny size that it actually fitted quite well)

However they point me in the direction of another company called 3P Technik UK Ltd based in Cardigan, Wales, who appear to ironically be a German company that makes diverters that seem to fit UK downpipes.

They have two diverter type models as far as I can see. The ‘Rain Collector’ model and the ‘Filter Collector’ model.

The sizes aren’t clear on the Rain Collector but the Filter Collector does specify the size of a normal UK downpipe and I may look into this further for my own uses.

So there you go, hopefully that helps a few people although I’d certainly drop them a line beforehand to check out any specifications that anyone might require. That’s my bit of public information for today.

Hey, promised we’d get back to a bit of politics didn’t I?

Our subject for today is Georgie ‘I is a greenie and I’m going to bung you some wonga in the process’ Osbourne.

OK, first lesson in recycling for George. In almost all cases there is no financial incentive in recycling. Sorry but there isn’t. One would hope that the bloke who wants to take over the country’s finances would be able to get his head around this.

Whether you like it or not, our economic structure is based on capitalism (yes, you don’t hear that word very often these days). Its driving principle is the creation of profit and that’s, well about it. There is no profit in recycling because when everything is reduced down to the hideously crude and simplistic concept of price, then barring a few odds and sods like some metals it’s simply easier (cheaper) to get new materials than it is to recycle old.

All ‘incentives’ to recycle are in fact sticks somewhere along the line. It doesn’t matter if you dress it up as we’re going to bung you some dosh to recycle because the premise on which that scheme is based is to creation of a false economy through regulation and or taxation.

In this case we’re dealing with landfill taxes on local authorities which is a pan-European scheme set up by the EU to encourage/force (choose whichever you fancy) member states to up their recycling rates because it’s been decided at a political level that reducing the amount of waste we as human beings produce is probably a good idea.

There’s nothing wrong with the introduction of targeted taxation to attempt to change societal behaviour as long as you can justify it with sound reasoning and preferably a lot of evidece to support your position too.

In the case of landfill, it’s fair to say you’d be hard pressed to find many people who think that reducing the amount of rubbish we chuck on tips is a bad idea although when you mention they might actually have to do something about it themselves or cough up a few bob then for some reason perspectives suddenly start to change a bit.

So we’re here, Osbourne’s little carrot is actually nothing more than the product of a very large EU stick that has created certain market conditions in the first place.

That of course leads us nicely on to the whole civil liberties malarky that seems to be doing the rounds of late.

The US company in question that Osbourne has so fallen in love with is RecycleBank and there’s two very interesting elements to their operation. The first being their use of ‘chipped’ bins. Yes folks we’re back to putting little bits a silicon chips in the bins to monitor how much waste we throw out.

Now for those with short memories, last year the Government was falling in love with the whole hi-tech approach of chipping everyone’s bins and forgive me for being a cynical old sod but wasn’t it all the Tories coming out of the woodwork saying it would be a crap idea (actually I agree with them on this one) and that flytipping would go though the roof.

There were a few pilots done, the first that springs to mind was South Norfolk District Council where it was such a disaster in both the technology breaking down and surprise surprise flytipping going through the roof that when the *ahem Tories took over the council they scrapped it.

Georgie boy might also want to have a word with Eric Pickles their very own local government spokesman because he said ‘they are also an invasion of people’s privacy’ on the issue of chipping people’s bins. Go on, what are the odds on another principled resignation of seat to stand in by-election moment? Nah, didn’t think so either.

To be fair to RecycleBank they seem really good folk and there’s nothing to suggest that they would use any information gleamed from such a system in a bad way. That said, they operate in the States where they have like proper bits of legislation and stuff written down on paper ensuring their citizens rights, not the data-mining free for all we have in the UK, seriously folks, the possibilities are endless.

How’s this for a wicked idea to catch out naughty people burning stuff in the back garden or flytipping. We could hand the service over to Tesco. They could monitor what we buy and if it doesn’t end up in our bin then we could get automatic fines as well, how’s that? Seriously folks, I’m here all week.

What Ozzy boy doesn’t exactly go out of his way to mention is the nature of payments, if indeed we’re taking RecycleBank as our model.

We’re not talking cold hard cash, you know, that stuff that’s readily accepted everywhere, even in the local boozer. No we’re talking tokens, and not the 30p off a box of Daz type (do they still sell Daz? Haven’t seen it for ages).

We’re talking (at least as far as can be ascertained from the information on their website) spend £50 in selected partner store and get £10 off tokens. OK, don’t quote those figures but we all know where we stand, to get the sweetener we’ve got to shell out a larger amount which is all well and good if you’ve got a reasonable income in the first place but if you’re getting by down to the last penny then are you going to have or even want to spend the extra to redeem the token?

What this approach also fails to address is the exact criticism the Tories were laying at the concept of pay as you bin last year. When you introduce a system whereby there is either a financial cost or benefit to putting less in your bin, doesn’t matter which. You will encourage fly-tipping and backyard burning because the financial incentive is there.

Of course what is continually being missed is not the actual desire or lack of from households to recycle, many aspects of the problems we face in the UK arise from the inability to recycle due to either poor facilities or, at least in my opinion poor packaging.

I’ve lived abroad, over a decade ago, seen how they did it back then. I’ve travelled about a bit, observed different recycling practices because it’s an area of personal interest but all came down to one very important factor. The recyclability of the packaging in the first place.

It doesn’t matter whether you try to penalise or incentivise recycling, if consumers can’t recycled the 2 litre bottle of coke they bought from Sainsbury’s then they can’t recycle it. They could if they lived in Finland or Germany but they can’t here. It’s the same product (admittedly produced locally under license) but in the UK it goes in the bin because it’s made of cheaper thinner plastic compared to thicker reusable (after being washed out) plastic abroad. There’s no scheme available to recycle them here, in other countries you just take them back to the supermarket, plonk them in a machine, it prints out a ticket that can be used at the checkout and hey presto, there’s your incentive system, it’s really not that hard and the whole lot doesn’t even have to be done by the public sector, you simply mandate the supermarkets to do it instead. They do after all have extensive distribution networks and it makes sense that after making deliveries they can do a pick up as well rather than driving back empty.

A bit of joined up thinking wouldn’t go amiss here.

I’ll finish on a positive point. It used to be (the last time I looked) impossible to recycle Tetrapak in the UK which is barmy. I was going to write a bit about it in this post but after some research it does appear to be picking up and your humble Penguin is planning a trip to Sandwell in the near future now he knows that he can recycle the milk cartons. Wednesbury to be precise as they apparently have a facility at the Leisure Centre. It’s just a bit sad that the most accessible facility for me is in an entirely different borough, but hey, that’s what you get from living in an area covered by Walsall Council I guess.

My final good deed for this post is a littl link to Tetrapaks recycling locator. I think I should move to Sandwell.

This is a politics blog, honest guv. Not like there’s been much in the way of it of late but I will try and rectify that in the near future as the rather hectic planting season draws to a close and the crops slowly, well grow.

Sometimes it’s a bit strange the posts that get attention. You can write at length about a complex political issue and zip, nothing. You can write about something as obscure as rainwater diverters and bang the inquiries start coming in.

So this is a special post for those who’ve dropped a comment on the blog or who have privately contacted me via the contacts section.

As I mentioned to Betty in the comments section on my original post about rainwater diverters I had a hunch that the manufacturer was actually the same one that produce the one’s sold at B&Q.

I just happened to drop into B&Q in Wednesbury today hunting for shelving which due to the wonders of modern society the helpful staff couldn’t tell me if they had the extra two brackets I needed in stock because the computer system was down.

Side note. I love computers, they’re ace, but if as a species we lose the ability to think ‘hang on I can nip in the stock room and have a look’ without the aid of microprocessors then we’re losing it. Either that or the person I spoke to was just lazy and couldn’t be arsed. They didn’t get a sale and my money went across the road to Ikea instead who were well helpful.

However while I was there I did think about Betty and pop outside to have a look at their drainage stock. The brand in question that they sell which is square and designed to connect to a water butt is produced by a company called Marley.

That rang a bell and I was sure it was the same brand as my German procured system.

A few searches later and I got to this site which is the German arm of Marley. Quite clearly, that’s the system that I’ve got that fits to a round downpipe and has a connector to hook up to a hosepipe as opposed to a water butt. Mines the DN75 btw.

Having a further scoop around I ended up at the main Marley site and it turns out that Markey are a UK company based in Kent which also appears to be their manufacturing base as well which is ironic that to get what I wanted I had to go all the way to Germany when it was banged out of a factory down the road. (Note, that’s one of those perspective remarks. Strictly speaking it would be hard to define Kent as being down the road from Wolverhampton but in contrast to Cottbus in Germany it would be).

So we know they’re made by a British company in Kent. What we don’t know is if they’re available here. I’ve sent off an inquiry to Marley about this to ask if they are available in the UK and I’ll post up their reply when I get it.

I’d like if I may, to tell a little tale about the conscientious environmentally aware parent and their hunt for a more environmentally friendly method of poo disposal for their little one.

When Little Penguin came along I’ll be the first to admit that we as parents probably did exactly what the vast majority of parents do. It was a whiz around Mothercare for various items followed by the steady routine of purchasing the various paraphernalia of associated accessories that go along with the rearing of small persons in modern day Britain.

Part and parcel of these is the procurement of nappies. I’ll be the first to admit it was a straight choice between disposables and terry towels of which Mrs Penguin certainly didn’t fancy the prospect of the terry towel option so like millions of other parents it was off for some disposables. Sometimes Huggies, sometimes Pampers but there really isn’t a great deal of choice out there spare the few own-brand versions.

About 18 months down the line having contributed no end to our countries ever increasing landfill problems I by chance came across the the Real Nappies Campaign and I started a bit of a personal crusade. It wasn’t going to affect Little Penguin but were a Littler Penguin to come along then the desire was definitely there to do something different second time around.

When Littler Penguin popped out last month there really wasn’t much choice, being premature and relatively tiny there was only the option of those ’size 0′ disposable nappies which worried me that we were going down the same path once again.

So a couple of weeks ago I took it upon myself to undertake a bit of a mission. Checked out the Real Nappy Campaign website for local stockists of reusable nappy solutions and headed off to Wolverhampton. The likely contenders listed were the obvious Mothercare, Boots and Waitrose.

First stop was Mothercare who do their own line in reusable nappies. It’s a complete system but having done a bit of totting up in my head the prices didn’t seem any more favourable than using disposables and much as I’d like to think it was purely an environmental concern at heart, I’d rather have preferred there to be a financial payoff as well. That said and this purely my own personal opinion, I didn’t much like the look of the Mothercare system either but it was all they had to offer.

So off I trundled to Boots who had nothing more than a couple of terry towels which wasn’t going to fly with the missus. Thinking that my last option was Waitrose and not being particularly up for a hike up the Penn Road I decided to get on the phone.

There are times in life when an internet enabled phone coupled with Google Search/Maps comes in very handy and this was one such time.

I spoke to a few of the other people listed on the Real Nappy Campaign site who mainly seemed to be home based suppliers but got some good advice, some of which was not to bother hiking to Waitrose. I talked a bit and finally came up with the kind of system I had in mind and was advised that the Bambino Mio range was probably my best option.

Sadly though no one knew a local outlet but going through the list I came across a store in Walsall called Kiddisave which for those with local knowledge is the place behind Woolworths with all the prams in the window.

Gave them a call and they had the Bambino Mio range in so off I toddled to Walsall very much to the annoyance of Mrs Penguin who I’d promised I’d only be out for an hour or so but t’was a trip worth making it was.

In the end I opted for one of the packs that contain three nappy outers, 12 cotton nappies and picked up a pack of the wraps and anti-bacterial washing stuff to boot. Cost about £50 all together which is a bit of a psychological barrier but when you consider the only part that needs buying again, the wraps, which are a fiver for 200. (the washing stuff will also need purchasing again but by the looks of it will last for a year).

The wraps also comprise the only disposable element of the system and are fully biodegradable and toilet flushable which is what we wanted.

So now we’re on to Bambino Mio’s which despite the name sounding decidedly Italian are actually a company from Northamptonshire so we can be equally content that we’re buying British as well. (to be precise the outers say made in the EU, and the wraps say ‘converted in the UK’ but to be fair, we don’t exactly grow much cotton in the UK so somewhere along the line something comes from afar but that’s good enough for me as it’s a UK based company that’s making the profit)

We’re not totally converted as of yet, it took a bit of learning and trial and error to get the folding and wrapping right and at nights we’ll still use some disposables for reasons that fellow parents will now but the principle is there and the bin is considerably less full on collection day than it was a few weeks ago.

If anything though, this little episode has taught me something. We’re using this kind of reusable system, not because there was a big fanfare of marketing aimed at us. Not because there was information about it in those packs that they give you at hospital when you’re going through the whole pregnancy thing (although there’s plenty of marketing in those packs for Pampers) but because out of pure bloody-mindedness it was something that we wanted to try. The problem is that to get to that point it took effort, research, asking around which I’m going to hazard a guess that most parents won’t be bothered with on the arrival of a little one as there’s far more important stuff to do.

When local authorities consider the cost of landfill tax then it would surely follow that they would have a strong vested interest in trying to make people aware of how they can use something other than disposables and it also figures that as at some point every parent has to visit said local authority to register the birth then some sort of information pack or even voucher scheme handed out at this point seems the most logical.

I’ll just add that yes, some local authorities do runs schemes along the lines of giving one-off payments of anything up to £70 on production of receipts for the purchase of reusable nappy systems. The only local one to these parts is Wolverhampton although we’ll see how long that lasts under the new Tory/LibDem alliance.

Much as I normally like to write at length, particularly where scientific related matters are concerned and stick to the science and not rely on personal observation but this whole thing about the changing global climate.

I’m not sure if it’s indicative of the nature of the blogosphere or more to do with its primary inhabitants spending more time in front of computer screens in urban areas with little vegetation than getting outside and communing with nature that there seems to be a fair bit in the way of denying it.

I’m a keen gardener despite my rather limited estate but last year wasn’t exactly the most productive of growing seasons.

If there isn’t something rather dodgy going on with our climate then can someone tell me why my roses were still budding a week before Christmas and at present there are Autumn leaves blowing around on the drive?

Sometimes in politics, at least for those of us who have been around for a fair time and have long memories, you come across politicians who you can only assume must think people are stupid or inhabit worlds where recollection doesn’t stretch back more than a fortnight.

When I first started becoming involved in politics, nothing more exciting than a bit of leafletting in the 1987 General Election the attack lines of the Tories back then after having been in power for eight years was very much to concentrate on attacking Labour for events in the 1970’s.

That’s a little taster about this post. We’re going to rake up something that one would presume David Cameron should be aware of and if not then here’s a little history lesson to go with his latest publicity stunt, sorry, meant to say informed and well thought through policy initiative.

From the BBC today. Cameron announces how the development of ‘green coal’ or to be more precise systems that allow the capture of carbon emissions from the burning/gasification of coal and subsequent safe storage, yes I know, not quite as catchy as ‘green coal’ but more accurate.

Your humble Penguin takes a keen interest in energy policy, in particular energy related security issues and this announcement by Cameron brought back a few memories from a conversation I had with my father in the early 90’s.

My father and I don’t always agree on every subject but I respect him as a very intelligent man who has an uncanny ability to see things long into the future. He also has an amazing ability to recall conversations and information from decades past, something I myself seem to have inherited.

So back in 1993 when Michael Heseltine as Trade Secretary was announcing what was in effect the death of the British coal industry, my fathers reaction was this:

“The stupid f*ckers! You wait and see, in 20 years time when all the North Sea gas is running out and we’ll have to import it all from bloody Russia they’ll realise they’ve dropped a b*llock. It’s all very well saying these new gas power stations are cleaner than coal but we’ve (as in British) been developing clean coal technology for years and you mark my words if the b*stards don’t pull all the funding on that too. You watch, in 20 years time we’ll have to go back to coal and we’ll pay for it because the mines will have flooded and we’ll have to buy the technology that we started back off some other country because those b*stards (the Tories) are too f*cking stupid to see what’s coming.”

You can probably guess that my father felt quite strongly on the issue and no, he’s not an ex-miner.

OK, it’s now almost 15 years later but apart from the timescale, I think my father pretty much got it right. The Tories through what I can only deduce was a political motivation, brought about the demise of our coal industry. They didn’t foresee what, if it was obvious to my father back then, presumably some expert at the time might have told them. Put simply, policy decision made back in 1993 following on from what occurred in the 1980’s led us into a position where we as a country are in an increasingly difficult position regarding our ability to generate our own energy requirements and more specifically threatens our future energy security.

With this recollection in mind I decided to have a little look around about what happened and came up with some interesting articles well worth a read. First up comes from the archives of the New Scientist in April 1993. That June, this article also appeared in the New Scientist by Ian Fells, professor of energy conversion at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, of which I particularly like the final couple of paragraphs:

” For a country with extensive coal reserves, why isn’t Britain developing its technology by way of a demonstration plant? On the idea of building a clean-coal demonstration plant in Britain, the White Paper points out that such a venture would ‘not materially affect the number of coal mines kept in operation in the UK this decade’ and so could not justify supporting it.

So, Britain watches its initial lead in this vital area slip away to its competitors. Long-term R&D is the major casualty of the ’short termism’ engendered by a market-led energy policy. Britain is in danger of destroying its innovative industrial base and becoming an offshore ‘banana republic’ buying licences for high technology engineering from its European partners. The government will be forced to balance the books by turning UK Ltd into a gigantic theme park with tourists visiting sanitised coal mines and gas works to see how Great Britain was in the old days.”

Couldn’t have put it better myself really.

So what did exactly happen to Britain’s leading edge technological advantage in the area of clean coal? The actual process wasn’t all that new. The original concept dates back to the 1960’s but in the days of the nationalised coal industry there was the Coal Research Establishment which formed part of the National Coal Board then British Coal Corporation. However with passing of the Coal Industry Act in 1995 it became the Coal Authority and was subsequently privatised.

Back in 1993 the research arm, the CRA found itself in difficulty because a substantial amount of its funding came from the industry which with the massive closure of pits led to less income meaning that for a short period the Government injected some funding with the usual reassurances that come before things get closed down.

Questions were asked in Parliament, notably on the 22nd March 1994 where the clearest indications of the level of importance the then Tory Government had regarding the development of coal technology can be seen in the statement by the Rt Hon Patrick McLoughlin MP after the token bit about how much money the Government is putting in:

“Precise funding needs after that will be agreed following the planned review of the programme involving the industry in 1995. We are also establishing the new Advisory Committee on Coal Research, to replace the coal task force and advise on United Kingdom coal research needs across the board.”

For those of a cynical nature you’ll probably all know what happened next. Industry wasn’t interested in the research and development after privatisation. They’d got the assets that they wanted and true to form the CRE (actual research part of it) closed in 1995, I think it still exists in name as some quango but as for actually doing any research it’s long gone, along with the clean coal technology that we had a chance to lead the world in. If you’re interested in a visual representation of what the Tories did to our research into clean coal technology you might want to have a look here. Caution, it’s depressing.

Of course it has been developed by other countries, notably Germany where they implemented the first ‘clean coal’ station but there again, the German’s didn’t have a Government that systematically went about destroying their coal industry like we did. Sad to think that Britain was in a prime position to dominate this emerging technology and now we’re reduced to buying back the fruits of that technology from the development of other countries into an area that we started. Let’s not get on to tilting trains either shall we?

I have a sneaky liking for the Times newspaper. Not exactly sure why and it’s something that has grown on me over the past few years. It’s got pedigree and amongst the gradually lowering standards of British journalism I’d always thought it seemed to hold itself up. That was until today.

I just happened to be in New Cross hospital in Wolverhampton this morning and while waiting around caught the front pages. I had a little look to see if it was in their online edition but couldn’t find it but the article was fairly simple. A cross comparison between David Cameron’s wind turbine and Gordon Brown’s solar panels on their respective home residencies.

Upshot was a cost comparison of payback time between the two systems and hey ho Davy boys windmill turned out to be better paying back in 60 years compared to 100 years for Brown’s solar panels.

This got me thinking because about 6 months ago I did all the sums to try and weigh up what would I do should I ever be in the lucky position of having enough spare cash lying around to consider domestic generation.

From memory the Times article (and please correct me if I’m wrong) said Davy Boy’s windmill cost him £3,000 and Gordon’s solar panels cost £15,000. Now I didn’t see any cross comparisons for the actual output of the systems and if they were buried in the article then they would be interesting but I was rather distracted at the time.

So Gordon’s panels come in at 5 times the price of Davy Boy’s windmill. I assume they’ve done a few simple sums regarding the price of leckie and the relative outputs of the systems and come up with a nice little headline but it is just a little bit more complicated than that because using these calculations they’ve only considered a one-off installation cost and given the timespans involved, that is misrepresenting the facts.

We’re going to have to make a few assumptions here but as far as domestic wind turbines are concerned you’re not likely to get more than a 1kWh system and 0.7kWh is far more reasonably and that’s running at optimum strength. Solar panels are dependent on on surface area and the quality of the silicon but when I did my investigations 6 months ago £15,000 would buy you the equivalent of a 4kWh system, again running at optimum output.

Let’s be kind and say Davy Boy’s got a 1kWh system and it always runs at maximum output. Let’s also assume that Gordon’s got a 4kWh system and also runs at optimum. So installation cost wise we’re talking about £3,000 a kWh for Dave’s turbine and £3,750 a kWh so yes, on that basis Gordon has picked the pricier option.

However, and it’s a big however. What’s the life-cycle of the relative systems. Well you would be very hard pressed to buy any solar panels that don’t come with at least a 20 year guarantee. There is a simple reason for this. Solar power is the only source of electricity generation that requires no moving parts. No moving parts equals no wear and tear on the system meaning that some of the first solar panels produced are still going strong after 30 years with no maintenance.

Now try getting a 20 year guarantee on a domestic wind turbine. 10 years yes, 20 years, forget it. At best a domestic wind turbine might last 25 years before needing replacing with a new unit. On top of that add in maintenance costs and replacement parts (primarily the bearings as they wear out) and the Times article starts to look a bit shoddy.

Whereas Gordon’s solar panels could last in theory easily over a hundred years, Davy boy will have gone through at least 4 turbines in that time and assuming relative prices that’s £12,000 to produce a quarter of the electricity of Gordon’s £15,000 solar panels.

Plain simple long term economics. Solar works out better in the long-run compared to wind turbines.

Now there’s an important factor to consider. I had a little look around and Gordon apparently installed his panels in 2005. I’m not sure what the market price then was but whereas the relative cost/efficiency of wind turbines has not improved dramatically, solar panels have in recent years so bear that in mind.

Final point. I did all the sums 6 months ago and the answer was simple. Given the choice and available funds, I wouldn’t touch a wind turbine with a barge pole. Solar is simply a far better option and as the market develops and costs are driven down further, solar is a far better bet for domestic electricity generation than a turbine. Doesn’t make any noise either to miff the neighbours off, which is nice.

Just got back from the first session of the 2007 Co-operative Party Annual Conference. Got 20 minutes or so to get back and find some supplies in the process so I’ll keep things brief.

The conference opened with a discussion Chaired by Gareth Thomas MP (He always seems to chair everything at conference) with a panel of Hilary Benn, a representative of businesses called Patricia and a guy from the Coop Group and someone from Friends of The Earth (yes I have an appalling memory for names I know).

There were a few key issues brought up in the discussion of which I’ll touch on.

The need to involve businesses particularly on the Research and Development side in driving forward greener technologies. An importance not to rush towards seemingly ‘green’ policies without thinking them through in particular relation to the marking of flowers flown in from Kenya that despite them being transported by air, would actually be more efficent than growing them in greenhouses in Holland. (The guy from Friends of the Earth mentioned that one, I do recall Hilary Benn saying something about it in February). That although there is good intention to label such flowers as having been transported by air, that it has led to consumers stopping buying such flowers and that not just the issue of the environment is important but the effect that it is having on Kenyan farmers.

The guy from the Co-op Group pointed to the big ambitions that it had set itself over ten years ago when such ‘green’ issues were not prevalent in the mainstream political discourse but even then the group took the decision not to invest in fossil fuel companies and I think what’s most important to note is that although that was the thinking of the Co-op Group a decade ago, the realities of future economic development and potential for long-term sustainable companies mean that the issues it was addressing then are now the issues that all businesses need to think about.

All in all things are going quite nicely. Met up with some familiar faces, got into an interesting conversation on home-made solar water heating systems and learned there’s a Black Country and Birmingham Inventors Society, might just have a look at that. Back in a Bit.

It’s taken a while, been truly frustrating that such a simple bit of kit isn’t readily available from the likes of B&Q or Homebase but while on holiday in Germany I picked up one of these.

It’s a rainwater diverter that simply fits into the down pipe and diverts rainwater via a hose to wherever you want it. When I’d first been perusing the guttering/piping section in the local DIY store I’d completely missed them but after having another good look they were staring me in the face all along and 16 EUR later I’m finally the proud owner of one.

It is interesting to compare the easy availability not to mention difference in price of such environmentally friendly bit of kit in Germany compared to the UK. I had a commitment to a certain project of which I’ll do a proper write up another time but finding the various elements has not necessarily been easy. I would hazard a guess that German society is simply more geared towards a market of consumers who do undertake such projects to save energy and resources.

In some ways that is a sad indication of how far we have to go in the UK to changing our living habits to conserve the environment around us. However is this a case of the market not responding to demand or the demand not being there in the first place? In my case the demand was there but the market supply wasn’t. I was lucky enough to just happen to be in Germany and have the ability to pick up the specific item that I wanted but that’s not an option for everyone.

Lets just hope now that the rainwater diverter fits. I haven’t measured the pipe yet but it looks about right and I’m sure I can fiddle it if I have to.

I’m a keen gardener. I’m proud of my humble little garden and we try to live a fairly ‘green’ lifestyle in our house. Apart from all the recycling and re-using of items we also compost as much as we can.

I have one of the Dalek style composters in the corner that I managed to pick up in the days when Walsall Council actually used to give them away for free. It suits the size of our garden and the household waste we produce which is why I’m completely envious of this.

This is Mrs Penguin’s father’s compost heap and it’s not far off the size our our entire garden. It’s got pumpkins growing on it and everything. Must buy a house with a bigger garden. With a compost heap that size and the amount of heat it throws off I could run the central heating through it.