My email to Greenpeace

[jnoshea]

I just wrote the following to greenpeace.  I wonder what their reply will be?

Dear Greenpeace,

I'm a little confused after reading your website.  I live in a super-insulated house, all my bulbs are low energy, all my appliances are the highest A rating of their kind.  I am a university scientist researching into solar cells. I walk to work. I buy my electricity from Good Energy so it comes from windfarms and waterfalls. We never fly abroad for our holidays.  We only have one car...a 10 year old Land Rover discovery. It does around 30 mpg and has 7 seats, we regularly use 6 of them.  Should I scrap it and buy a brand new car?  How much energy will it take to scrap it? More importantly, how much energy will it take to make the brand new car? Compare these figures to my emissions over the next 10 years and how much energy has been saved by keeping this car going instead of the making a new one every three years, and let me know how you get on.  Personally, I think all cars that burn fossil fuels are bad.  Why not focus your attention on gettting the fuel changed, not the efficiency of the cars that use it? It's pointless quibbling about 30 mpg or even 100 mpg. If it's fossil fuel we're burning, 100 mpg is still very bad in terms of climate change don't you agree?  I do my bit, in fact I do more than most to halt climate change and I operate a small tree nursery to grow trees that reabsorb my family's carbon emissions. Try not to make people like me, who actually care about the environment, take the blame because it's the easy route for you.  I fear that you have chosen to attack 4x4 owners because it is an emotive topic as they are often linked with wealth and greed, but remember that you are not going to halt climate change by doing this, only create a climate of contempt.  You are allowing non 4x4 drivers to not feel guilty about their own emissions because you provide them with a way to feel like they are making a difference, simply by hating someone else who they think is the real cause of the problem. I used to have the deepest respect for Greenpeace, now I will need a lot more convincing.  If you truly think that I should scrap my 10 year old Land Rover and buy a brand new car, then please let me know which one I should buy and explain why.

I would appreciate an intelligent debate on this subject.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards

James

[barmiebrumie]

I bet they never get it, it will be lost in syberspace :!: .


john.

[muddyweb]

My money is on a standard form response....

Best of luck James...  you are trying to apply knowledge, sense and rational argument...  how dare you !

[TimM]

My money is on a standard form response....

If you get any response at all....

Well worded though, the only logical answer to your query is to keep the Land Rover AND BE PROUD OF IT!

They should give you an award, not a 'label'.

[littlepow]

I doubt you'll get an intellegent reply. Probably just a rant about how your car undoes all your good work.

[Eeyore]

Nice mail - lets see what they come back with.

I'm still awaiting a response from the Lib dems about thier anti 4x4 stance  - maybe I shouldn't have pasted their standard response in as the first paragraph. Telling them it cheapens thier point and doesn't answer my questions probably wasn't what they wanted to hear. :lol:

Mind you, I did the same thing to North Yorks County Council and they went very quiet too..... I'll learn one day.

cheers
 8)
Eeyore

[Colin 009]

You are to be applauded James, for you effort in reducing greenhouse gases.

I think the email will fall on deaf ears though.

[Range Rover Blues]

I think that one will induce an "out of cheese error, please redo from start" in one of their addled Neural networks that used to pass for a brain before it was closed to all rational though.

Greenpiece, intelligent debate, don't hold your breath.

[the loon]

keep sending it untill you get a reply. Print it off and take a copy to your local green party MP.Post a copy to the head tree hugger and see if anything is forthcoming.
I have my doubts it will be

 :!:

[jnoshea]

Well I got a response this morning, and it's a real reply.  I will reply to them again later today.  I am certainly not happy that they feel they can attack all landrovers without correctly stating the aims of their campaign.  If they think their campaign does not affect people like me then they are mistaken.  It is breeding contempt amongst people who don't know any better and the result is that a horse-rescuer has had her Lexus vandalised and Jeremy Clarkson has a pie in his face at his honarary graduation.

Here's the response anyway:

Dear James

Thank you for taking the time to write to us and let us know your
opinions about our recent climate campaign.

The reason we have singled out Land Rover is that we have a new
situation developing in the UK where more and more 4x4's are being used
in innapropriate urban envronments, a trend that goes against the
current urgent need to make fuel efficiency a major priority.  Land
Rover has been fiercely promoting these vehicles as lifestyle
accessories, aimed at these new urban markets and Land Rover's parent
company, Ford, has stood in the way of government action to tackle
climate change.  

As you are obviously well aware of your environmental footprint and are
making a concerted effort to minimise your impact on the earth, this is
not a campaign that is aimed at people like yourself.  We as an
organisation occasionally use a Land Rover which is powered by LPG, when
we need a vehicle that can cope with the sort of terrain or tasks that
these vehicles were traditionally designed for.  We have had to simplify
our messaging with regard to the campaign in order that it has maximum
impact on Ford/Land Rover and those that they have been marketing to.

We are campaigning on the use of alternative fuels, particularly Bio
diesel where we have given it away free in London to show people,
particularly Taxi drivers, that their vehicles can run safely on this.
Unfortunately, we are in a situation where these fuels are some way from
becoming main stream and, in the interim, we have to focus on the issues
that are at hand.

I hope that your view of this particular campaign does not distract you
from the huge amount of good Greenpeace does.

[Eeyore]

Hmm, so there main gripe isn't about the inappropriate use of vehicles, then, only Land Rovers.

Seems intelligent to me. :roll:

I'd be interested in your response to this, your first letter got a reply, so who knows.

cheers
 8)
Eeyore

[littlepow]

Good job no one else like toyota, nissan, isuzu, mitsubishi, jeep... etc, make such vehicles.
That would just be horrific! :roll:

Oh well whats common sense got to do with political attacks on the minority drivers.

[the loon]

credit where credits due they did reply which is more than we expected but as has been said it only seems to be land rover who are a target not any other car makers  :-s

On there bit about "bio-disel" point them towards this as would be intrested in the treehuggers responce.

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1534821.html

Ok so maybe not the chosen animal listed i the article but I'm sure that most any animal would work.
Can see that you'll have 3 types of diesel
Normal
bio type one
bio type 2 (vegitarian diesel)

it makes sense if you read the article

[BRO]

From the 'Association of British Drivers' website http://www.abd.org.uk/

Although some people refer to carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles as "pollution", carbon dioxide is in fact a natural constituent of the atmosphere. It is breathed out by all living animals and is essential to the existence of all green plants, they breathe it in! In fact plants grow better in an atmosphere rich in carbon dioxide.

Of course we would not want to upset the balance of gases in the atmosphere, but the way some self-styled "environmentalists" talk you would think cars were major contributors to atmospheric carbon dioxide. This is not in fact the case; worldwide, all road transport contributes just 0.6% of atmospheric carbon dioxide!

The concern regarding carbon dioxide emissions is "global warming" yet many scientists are unconvinced that the phenomenon exists; and even if it does, they dispute that the overall effects would be negative.


Some other interesting stuff there too  :lol:

[jnoshea]

Ok. I found some time to reply to Chris at greenpeace, here's my response.  You might not agree with all of it, but I do, and I have deliberately not gone down the road of defending my human rights to drive a Land Rover but instead to focus on their immediate campaign:

Dear Chris,

Thanks for replying to my email, I do appreciate it.  I understand who your campaign against Land Rover is really aimed at, but even if Land Rover drivers like myself are not the intended victims, nevertheless we are feeling the brunt of this campaign through the growing climate of hatred against all forms of 4x4 vehicle.  The situation as I have tried to show is that a person's lifestyle as a whole is what really matters in addressing climate change.  People vandalising 4x4s or protesting outside schools know nothing of the life of the person inside that car or their reasons for having a Land Rover.  Aside from the fact that they may have to cross rough terrain for work or for their hobby (and we are all entitled to one) they might have a very large family or simply really enjoy driving it.  These are not bad reasons. I would prefer to see your campaign focussed on encouraging people to be responsible with their carbon emissions so that if they use a lot of fuel in their car, they make sacrifices in other areas such as the electricity they use in the home or buy local produce or invest in forestry.  Moreover, you say that Land Rover are marketing their cars as lifestyle accessories, but Porsche, Ferrari, Jaguar and Mercedes have done this for years and continue to do so, and many of these cars are much less fuel efficient than the current Land Rovers (especially the diesel models).  What is it that makes a Porsche Cayenne any more offensive to protestors than a Porsche Carrera? They do roughly the same miles to the gallon.  Finally, I would like to draw your attention to the graphic on you website entitled 'Wanted:Land Rover'.  This cartoon shows a Land Rover from the back with black smoke pouring out of the exhaust.  This sums up the misinformation of the current campaign for me: this looks like my 10 year old Land Rover discovery pulling away from a junction.  The black smoke that occasionally comes out of my exhaust as you well know has nothing to do with climate change, it is soot, CO2 is invisible. But the public don't know this. They see this picture and it is my Land Rover that becomes the target, not the brand new petrol Discovery 3 that I think your artists have tried to draw in this case (and I'm pretty sure you will never see a plume of black smoke emitted from one of those). I would strongly urge you to rethink this campaign, to steer it more towards education rather than aggression, and to widen it beyond Land Rovers and 4x4s to all cars.  Don't let people feel smug and comfortable because they drive a brand new Mini Cooper as these are barely more fuel efficient than a diesel Discovery 3.  Cars will always be a part of life, and when they are running on non-fossil fuels such as pure biodiesel or fuel-cells the type of car will no longer be an issue. How about changing your slogan from 'Land Rovers are wrecking the climate' to 'Our cars are wrecking the climate'? I think this would bring about a more profound and meanginful change of attitude amongst the population, don't you?

Best regards
James

[littlepow]

A very valid reply. I think that if you added all our aggresive rebutals, it would be discarded with no thought.


As to global warming, it is now being stated that the Earth is actual starting to cool in it's core, due to a change in its relational position to the sun. Which in turn is causing all the current weather and climate changes.

[MuddyMary]

It drives me mad that these organisations go on about peaceful protests when it seems that all they want to do really is upset and offend people.

I agree that we should all be aware of how we can look after our environment. People like us, ie those that greenlane and off road, are pretty aware of looking after our countryside and most of us I am sure do our bit with recycling, energy efficiency and other thing.

If Greenpeace and the like actually listened to the people instead of trying to tell people what they should think maybe more people would give their support, who knows  :roll:

[BRO]

good effort James  =D> - but it just goes to show you can't get through to them even speaking the same language... =;

Personally I don't believe that human CO2 emissions are making any difference to the so called 'global warming' effect.  #-o

Certainly for me to sell my LR Disco V8  \:D/ to someone else to drive and purchase another performance vehicle capable of carrying 7 people in comfort is not even going to be noticed on a CO2 level - in fact may make it worse if I choose to buy a new car instead of a 'pre-loved' one...  :roll:

Ah, well...

[Range Rover Blues]

They are Bl**dy Hypocrits

 We as an organisation occasionally use a Land Rover which is powered by LPG, when we need a vehicle that can cope with the sort of terrain or tasks that these vehicles were traditionally designed for.

Their 'need' is no greater than ours, they are not saving lives, saving money or even going to work, their 'need' may even involve criminal activety such as the destruction of GM crops, another typical greenpiece reaction, let's not have a rational debate, they've decided and that's all that counts so they destoy the crops and prevent researches from getting data to refute their claims.  Pi***cks.

[Eeyore]

Very well done, James.

Respect due.

Cheers
 8)
Eeyore

[thermidorthelobster]

Well James, I've avoided visiting this thread until now, because I thought I'd find it a struggle, but there's some sense being talked here.

For the record, and I know this is another area (see Clarkson) where I'll be disagreeing with most members, I do actually think Greenpeace have a point in targeting the promotion of large 4x4s as lifestyle cars.  This could make me a hypocrite, but there's a difference between those of us who use our 4x4s because they're the best tool for the job (for example, I frequently carry 7 passengers and a roof-rack full of stuff off-road) and those who buy a big, heavy V8 4x4 because they want to look cool.  I've actively considered buying something like a Prius for the times I don't need to use the Disco, but the argument about the environmental impact of running 2 cars instead of 1 is very valid.

And really, how many new Range Rovers are ever going to be used for anything you couldn't use a car half the size for?  Yes, some are, but the fact is that most of the time they're just lifestyle accessories, and I think this is what Greenpeace are objecting to.

If my car ever gets leafletted in London I'll be most annoyed, and I totally see the points everybody makes about knee-jerk reactions, but I still think there is some valid underlying messaging behind a lot of what's being said on the environmental side.

There, I've said it now...

[muddyweb]

For the record, and I know this is another area (see Clarkson) where I'll be disagreeing with most members, I do actually think Greenpeace have a point in targeting the promotion of large 4x4s as lifestyle cars.  This could make me a hypocrite, but there's a difference between those of us who use our 4x4s because they're the best tool for the job (for example, I frequently carry 7 passengers and a roof-rack full of stuff off-road) and those who buy a big, heavy V8 4x4 because they want to look cool.  
<snip>
And really, how many new Range Rovers are ever going to be used for anything you couldn't use a car half the size for?  Yes, some are, but the fact is that most of the time they're just lifestyle accessories, and I think this is what Greenpeace are objecting to.

So what ?  They go and buy a 4 Litre Jag or BMW instead... a bigger, wider Mercedes, a faster porsche or even a Citroen Saxo with a lower NCAP pedestrian rating ?!

The whole campaign is based on nonsense and hype....  I don't understand what motivates people to campaign for this sort of pointless, meaningless victimsation.

[thermidorthelobster]

So what ?  They go and buy a 4 Litre Jag or BMW instead... a bigger, wider Mercedes, a faster porsche or even a Citroen Saxo with a lower NCAP pedestrian rating ?!

Yes, absolutely, but that doesn't make any of it right.  I'd love to see big Mercs targeted equally for hounding off the streets of London.  And I fully accept that there's more emissions coming out of a couple of lorries rumbling through Africa somewhere than from the whole membership of mud-club.  But the fundamental point they're making is sound, imho.

[muddyweb]

But the fundamental point they're making is sound, imho.

If that fundamental point was trying to reduce vehicle numbers, helping to instill a culture of keeping vehicles longer and getting away from our disposable society, campaigning for the use of local produce and reducing the 'food miles' we use.....  then I might agree.

The fundamental point of saying that people who drive 'lifestyle' 4x4s are somehow worse than the rest of us is just bunkam...   sorry old chap... but I can't see any justification for picking on one group of people.

[Jake]

Good old Green Peace
Funny, i found their stand at Glastonbury and guess what....
a Rangie and a 110 on there.
Hmmm
HYPOCRAITES ????? :^o
Who nose?
 :lol:

[TUFFTEE]

Bl**dy cheek of some of these tree huggers!!

[Bulli]

Jake dont suppose you got close enough to see if they had lpg tanks or not?
I think we all need to do our bit for the planet . I run a diesel shogun, p plate and a J plate v8 disco. I dont do many miles in the disco but may do more when i get lpg on it. I bought the disco 2 years ago and surely this is an extremely good form of recycling. Most cars of that age have been sent to the scrap yard and yet mine starts every time and more importantly puts a huge smile on my face.
The problem I have with most tree huggers is that they are unwilling to accept an alternate point of view, anyone who knows me will appreciate I like nothing better than an debate.If you aren't with them you are seen as being against them and totally in the wrong.
Your letter should have been applauded by them and judging by it we(including most greenpeace members) have a lot to learn from you.
 My disco isnt very economical thats why i dont do many miles in it but what impact is it causing by sitting on my drive? None. I could buy a nice new econmomical small car but it wont fulfill my hobby and as has been pointed out will comsume lots of energy whilst being produced.
I would like to know in what way has their current campaingn got across their point about Ford obstucting government? It hasnt, cant wait for the summer fairs i shall be having my 2 penneth with any tree huggers form greenpeace that i come across.

[Jake]

Bulli
I could'nt see the back of the Range Rover
But, judging by its age i'd *guess* it was a V8
The 110 was a diesel.

I too drive two cars
Both Disco's.
A diesel which covers less than 6k every year and a V8 running on LPG. Which covers less than 3k a year.

[C C]

Well thought out and very well said.

[jnoshea]

Well still no reply from Greenpeace to the last email I posted...so I sent it again this morning. It took me ages to write that email, I'm not letting them ignore it  :D